Oh ... while we're piling on here, it just sunk into me that
mcv_get_match_bitmap is deciding what the semantics of an operator
are by seeing what it's using for a selectivity estimator.
That is just absolutely, completely wrong. For starters, it
means that the whole mechanism fails for any operator that wants
to use a specialized estimator --- hardly an unreasonable thing
to do. For another, it's going to be pretty unreliable for
extensions, because I do not think they're all careful about using
the right estimator --- a lot of 'em probably still haven't adapted
to the introduction of separate <= / >= estimators, for instance.
The right way to determine operator semantics is to look to see
whether they are in a btree opclass. That's what the rest of the
planner does, and there is no good reason for the mcv code to
do it some other way.
regards, tom lane
