Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfdusUvNn6MHSWkUwPtrCFyX+N7QCsH0bVWm=mHvQ5kEpSA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2011 06:48 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
Rebased with head.

Could you comment a little more on what changed?  There were a couple of areas Tom commented on:

-General code fixes
 Expensibe usage of "Max" macro is fixed in 0.5 version of patch.

-"pull out and apply the changes related to the RANGE_CONTAIN_EMPTY flag, and also remove the <> opclass entry"
 It's already done by Tom.

-Subdiff issues

The third one sounded hard to deal with, so presumably nothing there.
As I wrote before, I believe there is some limitation of current GiST interface. Most likely we're not going to change GiST interface now and have to do will solution of tradeoff. I think good way to do it is to select representive datasets and do some tests which will show which logic is more reasonable. Actually, I need some help with that, because I don't have enough of datasets.

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST for range types (was Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor)
Next
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2