Hi all,
I've reviewed Mark's anyarray_anyelement_operators-v2.patch
and the only remaining issue I've identified is the opr_sanity problem.
Mark seems to be in need of some input here from more experienced hackers, see below.
Hopefully someone can guide him in the right direction.
/Joel
On Sat, Feb 13, 2021, at 11:49, Mark Rofail wrote:
>Hey Joel,
>
>test opr_sanity ... FAILED
>
> AND binary_coercible(p2.opcintype, p1.amoplefttype));
> amopfamily | amopstrategy | amopopr
>------------+--------------+---------
>-(0 rows)
>+ 2745 | 5 | 6105
>+(1 row)
>-- Operators that are primary members of opclasses must be immutable (else
>-- it suggests that the index ordering isn't fixed). Operators that are
>This is due using anycompatiblearray for the left operand in @>>.
>To solve this problem we need to use @>>(anyarray,anyelement) or introduce a new opclass for gin indices.
>These are the two approaches that come to mind to solve this. Which one is the right way or is there another solution I am not aware of?
>That’s why I’m asking this on the mailing list, to get the community’s input.
