| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes |
| Date: | 2012-12-07 16:46:51 |
| Message-ID: | 25107.1354898811@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:29:22AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> On balance I am coming around to support the "just throw an error if
>> there are any invalid indexes" position. Adding extra complication in
>> pg_dump and pg_upgrade to handle ignoring them doesn't seem like a good
>> idea --- for one thing, it will evidently weaken the strength of the
>> same-number-of-relations cross-check.
> The check would remain the same --- the change would be to prevent
> invalid indexes from being considered on both the old and new servers.
But that weakens the check. For instance, if you had seven invalid
indexes in one cluster and eight in the other, you wouldn't notice.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-12-07 16:57:34 | Re: pg_upgrade problem with invalid indexes |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-12-07 16:41:03 | Re: ALTER TABLE ... NOREWRITE option |