Re: Extending opfamilies for GIN indexes
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Extending opfamilies for GIN indexes |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 21850.1295458157@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Extending opfamilies for GIN indexes (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Extending opfamilies for GIN indexes
Re: Extending opfamilies for GIN indexes |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>> Oh, wait a minute: there's a bad restriction there, namely that a
>> contrib module could only add "loose" operators that had different
>> declared input types from the ones known to the core opclass.
> I would have though that such contrib would then need to offer their own
> opfamily and opclasses, and users would have to use the specific opclass
> manually like they do e.g. for text_pattern_ops. Can't it work that way?
I think you missed the point: right now, to use both the core and
intarray operators on an integer[] column, you have to create *two*
GIN indexes, which will have exactly identical contents. I'm looking
for a way to let intarray extend the core opfamily definition so that
one index can serve.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: