Martjin,
> We can continue to support USING [op] as long as [op] is one of the GT
> or LT operators in the OPERATOR CLASS. This restriction may exist
> already, I can't tell.
>
> All we lose is the ability to say USING [arbitrary op]. Does anybody
> use this. Would people object to requiring the operator after USING to
> be part of an operator class?
Hmmm ... would this prevent the hackish workaround for case-insensitive sort?
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
