Re: Hash index creation warning

From: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David G Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Hash index creation warning
Date: 2015-06-12 22:00:54
Message-ID: CAA-aLv7G5aZu3eUT0s275qdavnh7bDmEUQHeEyQoN+rr_SJKPA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 18 October 2014 at 15:36, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:36:55PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:56:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > David G Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > > The question is whether we explain the implications of not being WAL-logged
>> > > in an error message or simply state the fact and let the documentation
>> > > explain the hazards - basically just output:
>> > > "hash indexes are not WAL-logged and their use is discouraged"
>> >
>> > +1. The warning message is not the place to be trying to explain all the
>> > details.
>>
>> OK, updated patch attached.
>
> Patch applied.

I only just noticed this item when I read the release notes. Should
we bother warning when used on an unlogged table?

--
Thom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Nolan 2015-06-12 22:07:01 Re: On columnar storage
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2015-06-12 20:28:04 Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation