Re: vacuumdb is failing with NUMBER OF INDEX TUPLES NOT

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Lonni Friedman wrote:

| Thanks for your reply. I thought (perhaps erroneously) that there
| wasn't any real difference between dropping an index then recreating
| it, and just reindexing an index?

I am definitely not sure, and I agree it sounds logical that they would
produce the same results. However my experience was that dropping and
re-creating the index worked.

The docs say :
"Another approach to dealing with a corrupted user-table index is just
to drop and recreate it. This may in fact be preferable if you would
like to maintain some semblance of normal operation on the table
meanwhile. REINDEX acquires exclusive lock on the table, while CREATE
INDEX only locks out writes not reads of the table."

Indicating that they should produce the same results, but that they work
differently. I am not sure what that implies, but maybe someone else knows ?

Regards
- --
Denis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-nr2 (Windows XP)

iD8DBQFAnPzivsCA6eRGOOARAl1OAKC0zcgN409n7ylgyHV61J9/o4LsBgCgqEpJ
yT24Y03fQItzhbRlxHyUg8s=
=YBoz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----