> I assume not having a type added to hash ops isn't fatal, because
> "numeric" isn't there and Jan strikes me as being a very thorough
> guy...
A hash index is probably even less useful than the btree index for
this type, unless it can be used with multi-column indices. Because
the hash will chain duplicate values into a list of some kind, and
you'll get *long* lists.
Find and steal the code for "char" (the real one-byte character type).
But a one-bit hash is what you really want, so it may be better to
implement your own.
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California
