On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 04:12:53PM +0300, Teodor Sigaev wrote: >> The short-term workaround for Rusty is probably to create his GIN >> index using the intarray-provided gin__int_ops opclass. But it > Right >> seems to me that we ought to get rid of intarray's @> and <@ operators >> and have the module depend on the core anyarray operators, just as we >> have already done for = and <>. Comments? > Agree, will do. Although built-in anyarray operators have ~N^2 behaviour > while intarray's version - only N*log(N) Is there a way to have the buily-in anyarray opeators be N*log(N)?
Ken -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
