> > > Actually Tom, i am not able to understand that completely. But what you are > saying that in the current scenario, when there is a broken data type based > index, then it will return no results, but never will return wrong results. > So never the update will corrupt the heap data. But i take it as you say > (please, correct me, if i am wrong). > But even returning no results might lead to failures in unqiue checks. > While i inserting, i try to check whether a particular data is already > inserted and if it returns no results, then it will go ahead and insert the > data assuming that the unique check has passed, while in reality it has > failed. > > Wait a minute. Bingo!!!! So for unique checks we are already going to > index from Heap. So it is the same thing i am doing with Thick index. So if > we can trust our current unique checks, then we should trust the Thick > index. > > Thanks Tom!!! for having this good conversation.... > > I think this broken data type problem / volatile function issue has to be > resolved for the current index, if we advocate to stop the thick index. > WOW!!! > > > Can i get a feedback from Tom / Heikki regarding my observation?
Regards, Gokul.
