Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
Gaetano Mendola [mailto:mendola@bigfoot.com] wrote:
>>
>>Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>>
>>>instead. Because it was impossible to make REINDEX transaction-safe
>>>then, such flag was needed to suppress inconsistency as less
>>>as possible.
>>
>>This mean that the actual REINDEX is not transaction-safe ?
>
>
> No.
> It was not transaction-safe long time ago.
Anyway I think there is a nasty bug somewhere, see my last posts
about "duplication primary key".
Regards
Gaetano Mendola