On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 20 March 2013 02:51, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If failures happen with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY, the system will be let >> with invalid indexes. I don't think that the user would like to see invalid >> indexes of >> an existing system being recreated as valid after a restore. >> So why not removing from a dump invalid indexes with something like the >> patch >> attached? >> This should perhaps be applied in pg_dump for versions down to 8.2 where >> CREATE >> INDEX CONCURRENTLY has been implemented? > > Invalid also means currently-in-progress, so it would be better to keep them > in.
For invalid indexes which are left hanging around in the database, if the index definition is included by pg_dump, it will likely cause pain during the restore. If the index build failed the first time and hasn't been manually dropped and recreated since then, it's a good bet it will fail the next time. Errors during restore can be more than just a nuisance; consider restores with --single-transaction. And if the index is simply currently-in-progress, it seems like the expected behavior would be for pg_dump to ignore it anyway. We don't include other DDL objects which are not yet committed while pg_dump is running. Josh -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
