RE: [HACKERS] Indexes bug

> I think we now know what is happening in the current cvs tree.  The
> optimizer calls op_class to find if there is an pg_opam entry for the
> expression (int4eq), the current index access type(btree), and the
> current index op class(int4_ops).
>
> In the case of oideqint4, there is no pg_amop to match it, and we
> can't
> add extra rows to pg_amop to make it work.  I suppose we could try
> adding a amopopr_compat column to pg_amop, and somehow do a lookup on
> that if the first one does not match.  Because of the way the system
> caches are structured, we would need a new cache for that extra
> column,
> I think.  There must be a better way.
>
Maybe I missed it but why can't we add the extra row to pg_amop.
        -DEJ