On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 12:39:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@siriusit.co.uk> writes:
> > So in conclusion, I think that patch looks good and that the extra time
> > I was seeing was due to RECHECK being applied to the && operator, and
> > not the time being spent within the index scan itself.
>
> Thanks, I appreciate the followup.
>
> I plan to go ahead and apply the patch to HEAD --- it doesn't conflict
> with Heikki's pending patch AFAICS, and no one has suggested an
> alternative that seems likely to get implemented soon.
>
> I am a bit tempted to apply it to 8.4 as well; otherwise the PostGIS
> people are likely to start cluttering their code with this
> add-a-dummy-function workaround, which would be unproductive in the long
> run. Comments?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
+1 for applying it to 8.4 as well.
Cheers,
Ken
