Re: Fixing r-tree semantics - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruno Wolff III
Subject Re: Fixing r-tree semantics
Date
Msg-id 20050627145751.GA18785@wolff.to
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fixing r-tree semantics  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Fixing r-tree semantics
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 09:52:03 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> 
> Now that the module uses GIST instead of r-tree, there's no very strong
> reason why it should provide these operators at all.  I propose removing
> all of << >> &< &> from contrib/cube, leaving only the four
> n-dimensional indexing operators (&& ~= ~ @).
> 
> Any objections?

I seem to remember there being a problem if <, <=, > and >= operators
didn't exist and doing some operations (distinct or group by?) that
required sorting the data type. I am not sure that you are suggesting
that these operators be removed, as you didn't list them in either the
remove or keep list above.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Fuhr
Date:
Subject: Re: accessing postgres conf from stored procedure
Next
From: "Dave Page"
Date:
Subject: For review: dbsize patch