| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs |
| Date: | 2008-12-18 14:41:45 |
| Message-ID: | 494A6129.3080303@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark wrote:
> It would be perfectly reasonable to add an amisrecoverable like Simon
> described. It could automatically set indisvalid to false after a crash
> and treat the index as if indisvalid is false during recovery. That
> would be a lot smoother and safer than what we have now.
>
> It might even be possible to do this with a new wal record type so it
> only happens if there was a write to the index. I imagine most users who
> read that warning and use hash indexes anyways are using them on
> read-only tables where they know it's safe.
This is essentially Alvaro's suggestions, which Simon has already given
a counterargument to.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-18 14:57:14 | Re: Preventing index scans for non-recoverable index AMs |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-12-18 14:36:18 | Re: Function with defval returns error |