Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I don't see anyone very excited about r-tree these days; have you
>> noticed that no one has stepped up to repair the known semantic errors?
>> I wouldn't spend any time on it in the prover.

> That sort of thing is always self-fulfilling.  If rtrees were fast, 
> logged and rad, then more people would use them :)

The prophecy I'd like to see become self-fulfilling is that we get GIST
to production quality and then r-trees wither on the vine because
there's no reason to use them.  I'm not aware of any reason to prefer
r-tree to an equivalent GIST opclass...

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to