Actually, discovered bug is not related to patch except new test faces
with it,
problem is: CompareIndexInfo() checks rd_opfamily for equality for all
attributes, not only for key attribute.
Patch attached. But it seems to me, field's names of
IndexInfo structure are a bit confused now:
int ii_NumIndexAttrs; /* total number of columns in index */
int ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs; /* number of key columns in
index */
AttrNumber ii_KeyAttrNumbers[INDEX_MAX_KEYS];
ii_KeyAttrNumbers contains all columns, i.e. it contains
ii_NumIndexAttrs number of columns, not a ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs number as
easy to think.
I suggest rename ii_KeyAttrNumbers to ii_AttrNumbers or
ii_IndexAttrNumbers. Opinions?
for (i = 0; i < info1->ii_NumIndexAttrs; i++)
{
if (maplen < info2->ii_KeyAttrNumbers[i])
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [email protected]
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/index.c b/src/backend/catalog/index.c
index 5d73e92901..0002816fcc 100644
--- a/src/backend/catalog/index.c
+++ b/src/backend/catalog/index.c
@@ -1831,6 +1831,10 @@ CompareIndexInfo(IndexInfo *info1, IndexInfo *info2,
if (info1->ii_NumIndexAttrs != info2->ii_NumIndexAttrs)
return false;
+ /* and same number of key attributes */
+ if (info1->ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs != info2->ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs)
+ return false;
+
/*
* and columns match through the attribute map (actual attribute numbers
* might differ!) Note that this implies that index columns that are
@@ -1850,7 +1854,9 @@ CompareIndexInfo(IndexInfo *info1, IndexInfo *info2,
if (collations1[i] != collations2[i])
return false;
- if (opfamilies1[i] != opfamilies2[i])
+
+ /* opfamily is valid on for key attributes */
+ if (i < info2->ii_NumIndexKeyAttrs && opfamilies1[i] != opfamilies2[i])
return false;
}
