On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:58:11PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-12-17 at 16:47 -0600, Kenneth Marshall wrote: > > > I think having your index survive a server power outage or other > > crash is a very good thing. Rebuilding a hash index for the case > > for which it is preferred (large, large tables) would be excrutiating. > > Completely agree. > > We may be outta time to make it happen. >
I agree. I was working on adding the WAL and ran up against the deadline. A rushed hash WAL implementation would be worse than the other alternatives. I plan on picking it back up after 8.4 is out the door. Regards, Ken -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
