On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Andreas Karlsson <andr...@proxel.se> wrote: > I like the patch because it means less operators to remember for me as a > PostgreSQL user. And at least for me inet is a rarely used type compared to > hstore, json and range types which all use @> and <@.
I agree that it would be nice to make the choice of operator names more consistent. I don't know if doing so will please more or fewer people than it annoys. I do not like this bit from the original post: EH> The patch removes the recently committed SP-GiST index support for the EH> existing operator symbols to give move reason to the users to use the EH> new symbols. That seems like the rough equivalent of throwing a wrench into the datacenter's backup generator to "encourage" them to maintain two separate and independent backup generators. If we're going to add the more-standard operator names as synonyms for the existing operator names, let's do precisely that and no more. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers