* You had consistently changed the simple_heap_update calls to do the wrong thing. (I'm surprised it didn't blow up on you in your testing.) In a sequence like
newtuple = heap_modifytuple(tup, rel, repl_val, repl_null, repl_repl);
simple_heap_update(rel, &newtuple->t_self, newtuple); CatalogUpdateIndexes(rel, newtuple);
the second parameter to simple_heap_update *must* be newtuple->t_self not tup->t_self. The reason is that simple_heap_update stores the new physical location of the updated tuple back into that parameter, and then the CatalogUpdateIndexes call relies on newtuple->t_self to generate new index entries. The way you had it coded, it was generating new index entries pointing at the old version of the tuple ...
Strange. I guess I must have been testing with a database that had short enough system catalogs that the indexes were never used?
Chris
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
