Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Hash index

From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: RAJU kumar <raju_19db(at)rediffmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Hash index
Date: 2005-08-30 20:54:52
Message-ID: 1125435291.28179.117.camel@state.g2switchworks.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin
On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 14:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com> writes:
> > Personally, I think that when one creates a non-btree index, one should
> > get a warning saying that non-btree indexes are not necessarily
> > transactionally safe in the event of a crash.
> 
> As of 8.1, GIST indexes are WAL-logged, so that would be inappropriate
> anyway.

Only in this exact instance.  It still might make sense to emit such a
warning / notice when using a non Wal logged index of any kind though.

Glad that GiST indexes got the WAL logging, btw, my tanks to whoever did
the work.

In response to

pgsql-admin by date

Next:From: anita.listeDate: 2005-08-30 21:17:31
Subject: Installation on SLES 9.2
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-08-30 20:20:03
Subject: Re: Hash index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group