Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Laurence Parry
Subject Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST
Date
Msg-id PA4PR07MB891006E0DA3E4ADB972E48F4A5C99@PA4PR07MB8910.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-docs
> This naming was evidently chosen to match btree, 
> which has both inet_ops and cidr_ops opclasses
> within its network_ops family.
> spgist only supports inet_ops

FWIW, the documentation for GIST has inet_ops in the equivalent table, so it was extra-confusing because I thought SP-GIST's inconsistency must have a reason - though I see now using '\dAf gist' suggests it's similar.

The index in question was replacing a default btree - we'd started using the table to block by range; when reviewing indexes, I found it wasn't used anymore. (I didn't know btree *had* cidr_ops, but that may be for the best, as it didn't help with 'CIDR contains IP'.)

Best regards,
--
Laurence 'GreenReaper' Parry
greenreaper.co.uk - Inkbunny.net

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Naming of network_ops vs. inet_ops for SP-GIST