Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Lawrence Cohan
Subject Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum
Date
Msg-id D125F8AF679AEE4390F3A546AFFA5CB00331A3DB@hermes.1shoppingcart.lan
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum
List pgsql-bugs
Isn't a PK a CONSTRAINT and not an INDEX???
Some say "one or more fields" and others "one or more attributes" that
uniquely identifies a record in a table and PG like many other databases
would create a default internal index on that CONSTRAINT that can't be
seen or dropped unless you will drop the Pkey.
In that case the two separate pg_class relhasindex and relhaspkey would
make sense indeed - just a thought nothing else and we'll take it as is.

Best regards,
Lawrence Cohan.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]=20
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 12:33 PM
To: Lawrence Cohan
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by
vacuum=20

"Lawrence Cohan" <lawrencec@1shoppingcart.com> writes:
> Is it possible that because of the PKEY's we have on the tables that
> flag is still showing "true"?

Uh, well certainly -- a PK is an index.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Lawrence Cohan"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #4238: pg_class.relhasindex not updated by vacuum