merge indexed fields instead of replacing on repeat add_index - #116
Merged
Conversation
…ten migration note
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #112.
Summary
IndexManager::add_indexreplaced an entity's index definition instead of merging, and the agent persisted only the newly-added fields — so registering a second indexed/unique field on one entity (e.g. anemailunique constraint then ausernameunique constraint) silently de-registered the first: itsidx/{entity}/{field}/…entries were orphaned, equality/range filters on it quietly fell back to full scans, and rows created afterward were never indexed on itadd_indexnow merges fields into the existing definition (an entity's index is the union of every field ever indexed on it, since entries are stored per field)Migration: a database created before this fix persisted only the last-registered field, so an earlier field lost to the old bug stays de-registered on upgrade — re-declare it via
add index/ the unique constraint to re-register and reindex; its orphaned entries are inert and never produce wrong results.Test plan
add_indexmerges (not replaces),merged_definitionunions without mutating, persist→reload keeps all fieldsadd_indexcalls is indexed on the first field too (fails under the old replace bug)