Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Still, it's an inconsistency in pg11. I vote -0 to getting it
> backpatched, mostly because it seems like more work than is warranted.
> (I think the work consists not only of testing that the backpatched
> commit works correctly, but also documenting for 11.4 release notes how
> to fix existing catalogs after upgrading.)
Yeah, I agree. Even if we back-patched a code change, nothing could
rely on relhassubclass for this purpose in a v11 database, because
of not knowing whether the user actually bothered to manually update
pre-existing indexes' entries. Better to know that it doesn't work
than to be unsure if it does.
regards, tom lane
