Tom Lane ha scritto:
OK, so if everyone is leaning to #3, the name game remains to be played.
Do we all agree on this:

        "x @> y" means "x contains y"
        "x @< y" means "x is contained in y"

Are we all prepared to sign a solemn oath to commit hara-kiri if we
invent a new datatype that gets this wrong?  No?  Maybe these still
aren't obvious enough.

Does this mean that also contrib/ltree operators will likely change for consistency?

ltree @> ltree
- returns TRUE if left argument is an ancestor of right argument (or equal).
ltree <@ ltree
- returns TRUE if left argument is a descendant of right argument (or equal).

Best regards
Matteo Beccati

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
      choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to