Re: reindexing an invalid index should not use ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: reindexing an invalid index should not use ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED
Date
Msg-id ZXEgsbDQoPgNN6Rx@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: reindexing an invalid index should not use ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: reindexing an invalid index should not use ERRCODE_INDEX_CORRUPTED
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 04:33:33PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 03:17:12PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> The "cannot" part of the message is also inaccurate, and it's not clear to me
>>> why we have this specific restriction at all.  REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY
>>> accepts such indexes, so I doubt it's an implementation gap.
>>
>> If you would reword that, what would you change?
>
> I'd do "skipping reindex of invalid index \"%s.%s\"".  If one wanted more,

In line with vacuum.c, that sounds like a good idea at the end.

> errhint("Use DROP INDEX or REINDEX INDEX.") would fit.

I'm OK with this suggestion as well.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Emitting JSON to file using COPY TO
Next
From: John Naylor
Date:
Subject: Re: Change GUC hashtable to use simplehash?