Annotations not preserved with adjustindexes [NPGSQL]

[fbjerggaard]

Using Finbuckle.MultiTenant 6.13.1 - Haven't tried in 7.0.1 but a quick look at the source tells me there are no changes in this part of the source.

Have the following code:

NpgsqlIndexBuilderExtensions.IncludeProperties(
	builder.HasIndex(x => new { x.Street, x.CountryCode, x.ZipCode, x.Created }),
	x => new { x.City, x.Coordinates, x.ValidatedBy })
	.IsCreatedConcurrently();
builder.IsMultiTenant().AdjustIndexes();

This results in the following migration (when creating only this index):

migrationBuilder.CreateIndex(
	name: "ix_address_street_country_code_zip_code_created",
	table: "address",
	columns: new[] { "street", "country_code", "zip_code", "created" })

However, swapping those two lines in the configuration "fixes" it:

builder.IsMultiTenant().AdjustIndexes();

NpgsqlIndexBuilderExtensions.IncludeProperties(
	builder.HasIndex(x => new { x.Street, x.CountryCode, x.ZipCode, x.Created }),
	x => new { x.City, x.Coordinates, x.ValidatedBy })
	.IsCreatedConcurrently();

Results in the following migration:

migrationBuilder.CreateIndex(
	name: "ix_address_street_country_code_zip_code_created",
	table: "address",
	columns: new[] { "street", "country_code", "zip_code", "created" })
	.Annotation("Npgsql:CreatedConcurrently", true)
	.Annotation("Npgsql:IndexInclude", new[] { "city", "coordinates", "validated_by" });

The only part missing is the TenantID here, which is expected due to the order in the configuration.

I think it might be fixable by adding this to the AdjustIndex method in MultiTenantEntityTypeBuilder

if (index.GetAnnotation() is IIndexAnnotation annotation)
{
	indexBuilder.HasAnnotation(annotation);
}

[AndrewTriesToCode]

I agree. Would you like to submit a PR or wait for me to make the change? Also in the first set of results you share above shouldn't tenant id be part of the generated migration?

[fbjerggaard]

Also in the first set of results you share above shouldn't tenant id be part of the generated migration?

Yes it should - I manually edited the code when pasting into here and forgot about that.

I can take a look at implementing the fix on monday