2011/6/19 Hitoshi Harada umi.tan...@gmail.com:
2011/6/17 Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com:
At this point I'm a bit lost -- while pg_amop.h has plenty of examples
of crosstype comparison operators for btree index methods, there are
none for GiST. Is GiST somehow a special case in this
2011/6/17 Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 22:16, Hitoshi Harada umi.tan...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't it worth adding new consistent function for those purposes? The
approach in the patch as stands looks kludge to me.
Thanks for your review. Coming back to this
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 22:16, Hitoshi Harada umi.tan...@gmail.com wrote:
I reviewed the patch and worried about hard-wired magic number as
StrategyNumber. At least you should use #define to indicate the
number's meaning.
In addition, the modified gist_box_consistent() is too dangerous;
Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com writes:
At this point I'm a bit lost -- while pg_amop.h has plenty of examples
of crosstype comparison operators for btree index methods, there are
none for GiST. Is GiST somehow a special case in this regard?
AFAIR, GIST doesn't use the concept of a
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Hitoshi Harada umi.tan...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/2/24 Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com:
While playing around with the BOX and POINT datatypes, I was surprised to
note that BOX @ POINT (and likewise POINT @ BOX) queries were not using
the GiST index I had
2011/2/24 Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com:
While playing around with the BOX and POINT datatypes, I was surprised to
note that BOX @ POINT (and likewise POINT @ BOX) queries were not using
the GiST index I had created on the BOX column. The attached patch adds a
new strategy
While playing around with the BOX and POINT datatypes, I was surprised to
note that BOX @ POINT (and likewise POINT @ BOX) queries were not using
the GiST index I had created on the BOX column. The attached patch adds a
new strategy @(BOX,POINT) to the box_ops opclass. Internally,
Andrew Tipton andrew.t.tip...@gmail.com wrote:
should I add this to CF-Next?
Yes.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
