Use the proper comparator in gbt_bit_ssup_cmp. If we're dealing with leaf entries, the function to call is bitcmp not byteacmp. Using byteacmp didn't lead to any obvious failure, but it did result in sorting the entries in a way not matching the datatype's actual sort order. Hence the constructed index would be less efficient than one would expect, and in particular worse than what you got before this code was added in v18 (by commit e4309f73f).
We might want to recommend that users reindex btree_gist indexes on bit/varbit columns. Author: Tom Lane <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Ayush Tiwari <[email protected]> Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/AH*avqcykhqgvvpwi1giu4oy.8.1781609375063.hmail.3020001...@tju.edu.cn Backpatch-through: 18 Branch ------ master Details ------- https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/a9fa6c69e3f5405866a0ebed27597e80760abc77 Modified Files -------------- contrib/btree_gist/btree_bit.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
