On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 18:54 -0700, Glen Parker wrote: > I am wondering the feasibility of having PG continue to work even if > non-essential indexes are gone or corrupt. I brought this basic concept > up at some point in the past, but now I have a different motivation, so > I want to strike up discussion about it again. This time around, I > simply don't want to back up indexes if I don't have to. Because > indexes contain essentially redundant data, losing one does not equate > to losing real data. Therefore, backing them up represents a lot of > overhead for very little benefit. Hello, I am sorry but this seems very silly. If you don't want to back up indexes use pg_dump. > > Any chance of something like this being done in the future? > I am going to go out on a limb here and say, "no". Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Consulting, Development, Support, Training 503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997 -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
