Corey Huinker <corey.huin...@gmail.com> writes:
> Just to confirm, we ARE able to assume dense packing of attributes in an
> index, and thus we can infer the attnum from the position of the attname in
> the aggregated array, and there's no need to do a parallel array_agg of
> attnums, yes?
Yes, absolutely, there are no dropped columns in indexes. See
upthread discussion.
We could have avoided two sub-selects for attstattarget too,
on the same principle: just collect them all and sort it out
later. That'd risk bloating pg_dump's storage, although maybe
we could have handled that by doing additional processing
while inspecting the results of getIndexes' query, so as not
to store anything in the common case.
regards, tom lane
