Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Yes, I thought of not dumping it. The problem is that we don't delete
> the index when it fails, so I assumed we didn't want to lose the index
> creation information. I need to understand why we did that.
Because CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY can't drop the index if it's already
failed. It's not because we want to do that, it's an implementation
restriction of the horrid kluge that is CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY.
regards, tom lane