Hi,
On 2019-01-21 15:21:29 -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> As a practical matter, most of the exact-test functions have a
> preamble that checks the bbox, so in the seqscan case having the
> operator along for the ride isn’t any advantage. In any event, if we
> do have exact tests w/o a lossy preamble, we could add that for v12,
> as this renovation won’t be a small one if we go this direction.
How expensive are the bbox checks in comparison to the exact tests? IOW,
how much of a problem is it to potentially do a bbox check twice?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
