Amit Langote writes:
> On 2016/10/11 21:40, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm ... I kind of wonder why we have int2vectoreq or hashint2vector at
>> all, likewise the hash opclass based on them.
> Agreed. So how about the attached patch to remove the said infrastructure?
On 2016/10/11 21:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> Amit Langote writes:
>> I was wrong that the index *never* gets used. It does in fact get used if
>> the operator is an ordering search operator (<, <=, >, >=), in which case
>> the query would use an array_ops operator (which
Amit Langote writes:
> I was wrong that the index *never* gets used. It does in fact get used if
> the operator is an ordering search operator (<, <=, >, >=), in which case
> the query would use an array_ops operator (which is a btree operator class
> for type
On 2016/10/11 15:58, Amit Langote wrote:
> If I create btree index on a int2vector column, it does not get used for
> queries because the query search always fails to match the index operator
> (family).
>
> During index creation, GetDefaultOpClass() returns array_ops for a
> int2vector index
If I create btree index on a int2vector column, it does not get used for
queries because the query search always fails to match the index operator
(family).
During index creation, GetDefaultOpClass() returns array_ops for a
int2vector index column, because type int2vector is binary-coercible with