On Fri, Dec  7, 2012 at 07:49:14PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2012-12-07 10:44:53 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >
> > > I wonder though if we shouldn't ignore !indislive indexes in pg_dump
> > > (and the respective bw-compat hack).
> 
> Obviously I wanted to ask whether we *should* ignore them in the future.
> 
> > Quite likely we shouldn't.  However, that is why it wasn't considered a
> > problem.
> 
> !indislive indexes are created during DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY. Thats a
> different case than CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY. Accessing their
> definition is actually problematic because i can vanish while youre
> examing it which could cause errors both in the backend and in pg_dump.

Is that something pg_upgrade need to worry about too?  Is
pg_index.indisvalid the only thing pg_upgrade need to check?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

• Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes at 2012-12-07 18:49:14 from Andres Freund

Responses

• Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes at 2012-12-07 18:59:41 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2012-12-07 18:59:41
	Subject: Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2012-12-07 18:54:44
	Subject: Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes