David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> It looks like 01e658fa74 is to blame for this.
> The test case can be simplified down to just:
> create table local (b bit);
> insert into local values('1'),('0');
> SELECT DISTINCT ROW(b) FROM local;
> Tom did have a look at this and raise the question about the
> possibility of not being able to hash in [1].
Huh. According to the thread, we discussed this exact possibility and
there's a test case verifying it ... so apparently something got
fat-fingered there.
> If it's going to be a problem detecting the lack of hashability during
> planning then maybe we can just add a hash opclass for BIT to fix this
> particular case.
Most certainly not. That would translate to a requirement that EVERY
data type have a hash function.
regards, tom lane