How useful is Recovery (in FileMaker Pro 11 and FileMaker Pro 13) as a pre-emptive diagnostic tool? If problems are fixed and reported, even if no symptoms of any problems are apparent, would you recommend alerting these clients to a need to rebuild those solutions from scratch and begin that process? Or…since there are no data or performance issues manifesting themselves in the live files, would you recommend just proceeding as is, understanding that there is the possibility of corruption later?
Here's some context...
I ran recovery on a number of separate client solutions, and many came back as having had a few structure or schema items modified (under 10) and no bad blocks. FileMaker recommends not using these recovered files. The original files themselves have displayed no problems whatsoever--recovery was done to see what the results would be. All backups, when recovered, show the same recovery modifications made. These solutions have been in use for years, and even the original files saved before deployment contain these errors--in other words, no original which Recovery doesn't modify. Any recovered library 'blobs' are pulled from the Home table in these solutions, which store settings like background colors and logos.
On practical terms, it is hard to justify to the client the investment in fixing problems which don't exist in a practical way…The question is, do these problem really in fact exist and the client is just waiting to uncover them. Are the Recovery tools acting like a canary in the coal mine saving us from some suffocating data loss down the road, or are these "fixes" red herrings sending me upstream for weeks of unnecessary work?