Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> While I'm not familiar with the code itself, and can't post the exact
> slow query just yet, I have noticed that it is missing a
> CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() call to enable cancelling the slow query. I'd
> backpatch this all the way back. (The exact issue they hit is mutual
On 11/12/15 19:18, Marco Nenciarini wrote:
> On 11/12/15 18:48, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> A customer of ours hit some very slow code while running the
>> @>(polygon, polygon) operator with some big polygons. I'm not familiar
>> with this stuff but I think the problem is that the
On 11/12/15 18:48, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A customer of ours hit some very slow code while running the
> @>(polygon, polygon) operator with some big polygons. I'm not familiar
> with this stuff but I think the problem is that the algorithm converges
> too slowly to a solution and also
