Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> writes:
> Given what a Bloom filter is/does, I'm having a hard time seeing how it
> makes much sense to support the boolean type.
> My biggest gripe with it at the moment is that the signature size should be
> expressed in bits, and then internally rounded up to a multiple of 16,
> rather than having it be expressed in 'uint16'.
> If that were done it would be easier to fix the documentation to be more
> understandable.
+1 ... that sort of definition seems much more future-proof, too.
IMO it's not too late to change this. (We probably don't want to change
the on-disk representation of the reloptions, but we could convert from
bits to words in bloptions().)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
