Re: WAL Bypass for indexes

"Martin Scholes" <marty(at)iicolo(dot)com> writes:
> On a related note, we currently have some indexes that are unsafe during
> recovery (GIST and Hash come to mind).

> In the spirit of making Pg "safe at any speed," would it make sense to put
> some code in the recovery section that rebuilds all indexes whose integrity
> cannot be assured?

This is no longer true for GIST, and hash really ought to be fixed to
support WAL. The combination of a performance advantage and being able
to postpone fixing hash might be enough of a reason to add a
post-recovery index rebuild feature, but I don't think the latter
alone is --- fixing hash would be less work as well as being the "right"
answer.

regards, tom lane