"Pavan Deolasee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here is a patch which fixes this. We re-read part of the pg_index
> row and update rd_index with the new data. I tested REINDEX and CIC
> and both seems to work fine with the patch applied.
> Tom, does this look good ?
It seems a bit brute-force. Why didn't you use SearchSysCache(INDEXRELID)
the same as RelationInitIndexAccessInfo does? And what's the point of
the extra tuple copy step, instead of assigning the values into the
cache entry immediately?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
