summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js')
-rw-r--r--jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js107
1 files changed, 107 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js b/jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..2ca88081fa7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/jstests/core/apply_ops_invalid_index_spec.js
@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+/**
+ * Tests how applyOps handles index specs with unknown fields.
+ *
+ * We subject index specs with version 2 or later to stricter validation than version 1 index specs.
+ * When given an index spec with an unrecognized field, applyOps will reject v:2 indexes with an
+ * InvalidIndexSpecificationOption error while v:1 indexes are accepted as-is.
+ *
+ * @tags: [
+ * requires_non_retryable_commands,
+ * requires_fastcount,
+ *
+ * # applyOps uses the oplog which requires replication support.
+ * requires_replication,
+ * ]
+ */
+
+(function() {
+ 'use strict';
+
+ const t = db.apply_ops_invalid_index_spec;
+ t.drop();
+
+ const collNs = t.getFullName();
+ const cmdNs = db.getName() + '.$cmd';
+ const systemIndexesNs = db.getCollection('system.indexes').getFullName();
+
+ assert.commandWorked(db.createCollection(t.getName()));
+ assert.writeOK(t.save({_id: 100, a: 100}));
+
+ // Tests that db.collection.createIndex() fails when given an index spec containing an unknown
+ // field.
+ assert.commandFailedWithCode(t.createIndex({a: 1}, {v: 2, name: 'a_1_base_v2', unknown: 1}),
+ ErrorCodes.InvalidIndexSpecificationOption);
+ assert.commandFailedWithCode(t.createIndex({a: 1}, {v: 1, name: 'a_1_base_v1', unknown: 1}),
+ ErrorCodes.InvalidIndexSpecificationOption);
+
+ // Inserting a v:2 index directly into system.indexes with an unknown field in the index
+ // spec should return an error.
+ assert.commandFailedWithCode(db.adminCommand({
+ applyOps: [{
+ op: 'i',
+ ns: systemIndexesNs,
+ o: {v: 2, key: {a: 1}, name: 'a_1_system_v2', ns: collNs, unknown: 1},
+ }],
+ }),
+ ErrorCodes.InvalidIndexSpecificationOption);
+
+ // Inserting a v:1 index directly into system.indexes with an unknown field in the index spec
+ // should ignore the unrecognized field and create the index.
+ assert.commandWorked(db.adminCommand({
+ applyOps: [{
+ op: 'i',
+ ns: systemIndexesNs,
+ o: {v: 1, key: {a: 1}, name: 'a_1_system_v1', ns: collNs, unknown: 1},
+ }],
+ }));
+
+ //
+ // Background indexes should be subject to the same level of validation as foreground indexes.
+ //
+
+ // Inserting a background index directly into system.indexes with a bad index key pattern should
+ // return an error.
+ assert.commandFailedWithCode(db.adminCommand({
+ applyOps: [{
+ op: 'i',
+ ns: systemIndexesNs,
+ o: {key: {b: 'sideways'}, name: 'b_1_bg_system_v2', ns: collNs, background: true},
+ }],
+ }),
+ ErrorCodes.CannotCreateIndex);
+
+ // Inserting a v:2 background index directly into system.indexes with an unknown field in the
+ // index spec should return an error.
+ assert.commandFailedWithCode(db.adminCommand({
+ applyOps: [{
+ op: 'i',
+ ns: systemIndexesNs,
+ o: {
+ v: 2,
+ key: {b: 1},
+ name: 'b_1_bg_system_v2',
+ ns: collNs,
+ background: true,
+ unknown: true,
+ },
+ }],
+ }),
+ ErrorCodes.InvalidIndexSpecificationOption);
+
+ // Inserting a background v:1 index directly into system.indexes with an unknown field in the
+ // index spec should work.
+ assert.commandWorked(db.adminCommand({
+ applyOps: [{
+ op: 'i',
+ ns: systemIndexesNs,
+ o: {
+ v: 1,
+ key: {b: 1},
+ name: 'b_1_bg_system_v1',
+ ns: collNs,
+ background: true,
+ unknown: true,
+ },
+ }],
+ }));
+})();