On 18 October 2014 at 02:36, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:56:52PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> David G Johnston <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes: >> > The question is whether we explain the implications of not being WAL-logged >> > in an error message or simply state the fact and let the documentation >> > explain the hazards - basically just output: >> > "hash indexes are not WAL-logged and their use is discouraged" >> >> +1. The warning message is not the place to be trying to explain all the >> details.
While I don't think it should explain all the details, "WAL-logged" will mean *nothing* to most users, including most of those who're using streaming replication, PITR, etc. I would strongly prefer to see something that conveys some meaning to a user who doesn't know PostgreSQL's innards, since by the time "WAL logged" means much to you, you've got a good chance of having already learned that hash indexes aren't crash-safe. Or of reading the manual. Perhaps: WARNING: hash indexes are not crash-safe, not replicated, and their use is discouraged ? -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
