25.03.2014 13:57, [email protected] wrote: > > From what I see in the corresponding bug tracker cases and version > control commits, only compound indices containing NULL values seem to be > affected. We only have one single compound index, and this doesn't > contain NULL values at all.
I'd say that rebuilding a single index is unlikely to take "very very long time", if you want to be on the safe side. > Also, a comment i n Firebird commit 57074 sais the following: > > Restored the ODS level compatibility with v2.5.1 index keys, while > using the "old good" index key format in new indices. It allows to > claim that CORE-3675 and CORE-3853 are fixed (after migration via > backup/restore) but still operate almost correctly with keys created > in v2.5.1. This is *much* better than silently returning wrong data > if a v2.5.1 database is used with v2.5.2 without backup/restore. > > Which I understand causes that 2.5.1 indexes work the same way in 2.5.2 > as they worked in 2.5.1. Yes, they work the same [incorrect] way. But you may not notice the problems as long you don't have NULLs in that index. > So, am I correct that in effect nothing really has to be done by our > customers when upgrading to 2.5.2? It looks so, in your particular case. Dmitry
