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.

Reply via email to