Mark Rofail wrote: > > In particular: it seemed to me that you decided to throw away the idea > > of the new GIN operator without sufficient evidence that it was > > unnecessary. > > I have to admit to that. But in my defence @> is also GIN indexable so the > only difference in performance between 'anyarray @>> anyelement' and > 'anyarray @> ARRAY [anyelement]' is the delay caused by the ARRAY[] > operation theoretically.
I think I need to review Tom's bounce-for-rework email https://postgr.es/m/28389.1351094...@sss.pgh.pa.us to respond to this intelligently. Tom mentioned @> there but there was a comment about the comparison semantics used by that operator, so I'm unclear on whether or not that issue has been fixed. -- Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services