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 (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers