On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Emre Hasegeli <e...@hasegeli.com> wrote:
> > This was already fixed for GiST. > > See following discussion > > > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/capphfdvgticgniaj88vchzhboxjobuhjlm6c09q_op_u9eo...@mail.gmail.com > > and commit > > > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=3c29b196b0ce46662cb9bb7a1f91079fbacbcabb > > "Consistent" method of GiST influences only search and can't lead to > corrupt > > indexes. However, "same" method can lead to corrupt indexes. > > However, this is not the reason to not backpatch the changes and preserve > > buggy behaviour; this is the reason to recommend reindexing to users. > And it > > was already backpatched. > > Fixing it on the opclass is not an option for BRIN. We designed BRIN > opclasses extensible using extra SQL level support functions and > operators. It is possible to support point datatype using box vs > point operators. Doing so would lead to wrong results, because point > operators use FP macros, but box_contain_pt() doesn't. > You still can workaround this problem in opclass. For instance, you can assign different strategy number for this case. And call another support function instead of overlap operator in brin_inclusion_consistent. For sure, this would be a kluge. > GiST opclass could be more clean and extensible, if we wouldn't have > those macros. > In my opinion it would be cool remove FP macros. I see absolutely no sense in them. But since it break compatibility it would be quite hard though. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
