On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:40 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > AFAICT that would break on-disk compatibility of pg_trgm GIST indexes. > I don't believe we have adequate evidence to justify doing that, and > in any case it ought to be a separate patch rather than buried inside a > mostly unrelated feature patch. > Ok. Actually, I don't think just increasement of SIGLENINT as a solution. I beleive that we need to have it as index parameter. I'll try to provide more of tests in order to motivate this.
---- With best regards, Alexander Korotkov.