Re: Corrupt RTREE index
| От | Dann Corbit |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Corrupt RTREE index |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | D425483C2C5C9F49B5B7A41F89441547055736@postal.corporate.connx.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Corrupt RTREE index (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
| Список | pgsql-general |
-----Original Message----- From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Greg Stark Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 8:49 PM To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Corrupt RTREE index Scott Marlowe <smarlowe@g2switchworks.com> writes: > IS this same issue true for hash or GiST indexes? I think that's true, afaik rtree, GiST, and hash are all not WAL-logged. > On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 13:49, Dann Corbit wrote: > > I suggest a warning (if there is not already one generated) on create > > index for rtree indexes so that users know that they are not fully > > supported. I'm not sure what he means by "supported" though. I'm getting all the support I'm paying for, plus a whole lot more. >> By "supported" I mean the operations against the index are logged, so that if someone kicks the plug out of the wall on my PostgreSQL database and I walk over and plug it back in, I can rely on my btree indexes but all bets are off for hash, rtree and gist indexes when the server restarts. Or perhaps I misunderstand the repercussions of index types not being included in the WAL. <<
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: