Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Rename such opclasses and make them not default.
>> Create new default opclasses with bitwise comparison functions.
>> Write recommendation to re-create indexes with default opclasses into
>> documentation.
> I certainly think this should be fixed if at all possible, but I'm not
> sure about this plan. Can we really rename an opclass without
> consequence, including having that respected across pg_upgrade?
No. And we don't know how to change the default opclass without
breaking things, either. See previous discussions about how we
might fix the totally-broken default gist opclass that btree_gist
creates for the inet type [1]. The motivation for getting rid of that
is *way* stronger than "it might be slow", but there's no apparent
way to make something else be the default without creating havoc.
regards, tom lane
[1]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/cae2gyzyuesd188j0b290gf16502h9b-lwnrs3rfi1swdb9q...@mail.gmail.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
