> 
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Log message:
> >> Seems like a bad idea that REINDEX TABLE supports (or 
> >> thinks it does)
> >> reindexing system tables without ignoring system 
> >> indexes, 
> 
> > Why ?
> 
> I'd ask the question the other way: why would it be a good 
> idea to allow
> this in REINDEX TABLE and not in the other two cases?  And 
> did it really
> work?

Yes. I would revert your change.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to