by Mike <mikm524@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Aug 16, 2007 at 04:44 PM
On Aug 15, 6:20?pm, Gene Wirchenko <ge...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Josh Assing <Xjo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> I am not aware of anything either. I have occasionally wished
> >>for something. It could be a useful piece of data that indexes have
> >>gotten corrupted or are just fine. ("Have we finally nailed that
> >>problem that was resulting in corrupted files?" "No index problems
> >>since, so probably.")
>
> >It'd be easy enough to write the code to do it -- but like I said --
it'd take
> >longer to check the index that it would to recreate it.
>
> Go ahead. It is not sufficient to check each row against the key
> value. One would also have to check that there are no other key
> values in the index. I do not see how this could be done without
> getting into implementation-dependent code.
>
> As far as it being slower, that is not relevant. Building
> indexes and checking indexes are two different things.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko
>
> Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
> I have preferences.
> You have biases.
> He/She has prejudices.
Thanks guys for your feedback.