On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
> On 6/12/15 5:00 PM, Thom Brown wrote:
>>
>> On 18 October 2014 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:36:55PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:56:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question is whether we explain the implications of not being
>>>>>> WAL-logged
>>>>>> in an error message or simply state the fact and let the documentation
>>>>>> explain the hazards - basically just output:
>>>>>> "hash indexes are not WAL-logged and their use is discouraged"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1. The warning message is not the place to be trying to explain all
>>>>> the
>>>>> details.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OK, updated patch attached.
>>>
>>>
>>> Patch applied.
>>
>>
>> I only just noticed this item when I read the release notes. Should
>> we bother warning when used on an unlogged table?
>
>
> Not really; but I think the bigger question at this point is if we want to
> change it this late in the game.
Changing it even during beta looks acceptable to me. I think that it
is mainly a matter to have a patch (here is one), and someone to push
it as everybody here seem to agree that for UNLOGGED tables this
warning has little sense.
--
Michael
