I wrote:
> I believe I've worked out what's going on in bug #5985.
> ...
> So this leads me to a few thoughts:
> 1. Now that we have the seqscan-and-sort code path, it'd be possible to
> support CLUSTER on a not-indisvalid index, at least when it's a btree
> index. We just have to force it into t
I believe I've worked out what's going on in bug #5985. The example
script contains an UPDATE on a table, then a creation of an index,
then a CLUSTER on that index, all within one transaction. If the
UPDATE does any HOT updates, then the index is going to be marked
with indcheckxmin horizon equal
