Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs
Date
Msg-id 494A6129.3080303@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs  (Greg Stark <greg.stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greg Stark wrote:
> It would be perfectly reasonable to add an amisrecoverable like Simon 
> described. It could automatically set indisvalid to false after a crash 
> and treat the index as if indisvalid is false during recovery. That 
> would be a lot smoother and safer than what we have now.
> 
> It might even be possible to do this with a new wal record type so it 
> only happens if there was a write to the index. I imagine most users who 
> read that warning and use hash indexes anyways are using them on 
> read-only tables where they know it's safe.

This is essentially Alvaro's suggestions, which Simon has already given 
a counterargument to.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Function with defval returns error
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs