Re: Draft back-branch release notes are up for review

Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 02:11:41PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> I agree that this isn't terribly significant in general. Your proposed
>> wording seems better than what we have now, but a reference to INCLUDE
>> indexes also seems like a good idea. They are the only type of index
>> that could possibly have the issue with page deletion/VACUUM becoming
>> confused.

> If true, that's important to mention, yes.

Thanks for the input, guys.  What do you think of

     Avoid writing an invalid empty btree index page in the unlikely case
     that a failure occurs while processing INCLUDEd columns during a page
     split (Peter Geoghegan)

     The invalid page would not affect normal index operations, but it
     might cause failures in subsequent VACUUMs. If that has happened to
     one of your indexes, recover by reindexing the index.

            regards, tom lane