Re: Inconsistency between attname of index and attname of relation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ronan Dunklau <ronan_dunklau(at)ultimatesoftware(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inconsistency between attname of index and attname of relation
Date: 2019-07-05 14:22:11
Message-ID: 2032.1562336531@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ronan Dunklau <ronan_dunklau(at)ultimatesoftware(dot)com> writes:
> I've noticed that renaming an indexed column produces inconsistencies in
> the catalog. Namely, the attname of the attribute of the relation is
> properly updated, whereas the attname of the attribute in the index is not,
> and keeps the old value.

If memory serves, we used to try to rename index columns, and gave up
on that because it caused problems of its own. That's (one reason) why
modern versions of psql show a "definition" column in \d of an index.

> I think this could be considered a bug in Postgres.

It is not.

> If it isn't, what
> should be the proper way to retrieve this information ?

psql uses pg_get_indexdef(), looks like.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-07-05 14:27:32 Re: [PATCH] Implement uuid_version()
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-07-05 14:21:26 Re: [PATCH] Implement uuid_version()