>the bottom half might be messed up too. So we are failing to exploit
>the full intended "sign" space, which presumably is costing something
>in index efficiency.
>
>
>
You are absolutly right. My fault.
>It looks to me like the values calculated by this routine end up on
>disk, and therefore we can't fix it without forcing an initdb, or
>at least REINDEX of all affected indexes. Is that correct?
>
>
No. query_gist.c exists only in HEAD branch. That code is devloped
not a lot time ago, and itsn't tested well yet.
