On 2019-Jul-17, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Maybe nbtree VACUUM should do something more aggressive than give up > when there is a "failed to re-find parent key" or similar condition. > Perhaps it would make more sense to make the index inactive (for some > value of "inactive") instead of just complaining. That might be the > least worst option, all things considered. Maybe we can mark an index as unvacuumable in some way? As far as I understand, all queries using that index work, as do index updates; it's just vacuuming that fails. If we mark the index as unvacuumable, then vacuum just skips it (and does not run phase 3 for that table), and things can proceed; the table's age can still be advanced. Obviously it'll result in more bloat than in normal condition, but it shouldn't cause the whole cluster to go down. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
