On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 11:13 AM Peter Geoghegan <p...@bowt.ie> wrote: > I'm pretty sure that I could fix this by simply removing the > assertion. But I need to think about it a bit more before I push a > fix. > > The test case you've provided proves that _bt_preprocess_keys's > new no-op path isn't just used during scans that have array keys (your > test case doesn't have a SAOP at all). This was never intended. On the > other hand, I think that it's still correct (or will be once the assertion is > gone), and it seems like it would be simpler to allow this case (and > document it) than to not allow it at all.
Pushed a fix like that just now. Thanks for the report, Alexander. -- Peter Geoghegan
