>
> Applying intltsel, as 6.4 did, was so bogus that it's difficult
> to argue that the resulting numbers were better than the 0.5
> default estimate I just put into btreesel ;-) ... so I feel no
> special desire to return to the status quo ante. I have a to-do
> list item to look at the whole selectivity estimation business,
> and I will try to figure out something reasonable for rtrees
> while I'm at it. It may be a while before that gets to the top
> of the to-do list (unless someone else gets to it before I do),
> but I think this patch will do fine until then.
>
> Mostly I'm embarrassed that we didn't notice the problem during
> beta testing :-(. No regression test, and no users of rtrees
> in the beta population either, it would seem.
>
No reason to be emarrassed. This 6.5 release is our smoothest yet.
Sometimes, we had some pretty major initial problems, and at this stage,
we would be figuring out when we needed to get the next subrelease out.
We are sitting around at this point, just tweeking things, and have no
major need to rush into a minor release to fix problems because we don't
have a flood of identical bug reports that have users screaming.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
