Jan Wieck wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> >> Is there anything stopping us going through the code and finding all
> >> ereports that can be fixed by a REINDEX, and issue a HINT with all of
> >> them saying that they should REINDEX the broken index?
> >
> > How would you know which ones correspond to REINDEX-fixable conditions?
> >
> > I generally dislike hints that tell people their first action should be
> > to destroy the evidence, anyway. If they had an index problem, REINDEX
> > will guarantee there is no chance of learning anything about it.
>
> I couldn't agree more. Look at this very instance. He now found the
> right reindex command and the corrupted file is gone. We don't have the
> slightest clue what happened to that file. Was it truncated? Did some
> other process scribble around in the shared memory? How do you tell now?
Does he have bad RAM? Good point. Should we give a hint to report it
to us?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073