Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to postgrespro.com

Request a Demo
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Fixing r-tree semantics - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Fixing r-tree semantics
Date
Msg-id [email protected]
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Fixing r-tree semantics  (Andrew - Supernews <[email protected]>)
Responses Re: Fixing r-tree semantics
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
Andrew - Supernews <[email protected]> writes:
> On 2005-06-23, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I looked into the r-tree breakage discussed in this thread:
>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2004-03/msg01135.php

> See also http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2005-01/msg00328.php
> in which I made most of the same points.

So you did --- I had forgotten.  Good to see that we arrived at the same
conclusions.

> Notice also that contrib/seg and contrib/cube have their own, and
> incompatible, idea of what the semantics of &< and &> should be.

Um.  Not sure what to do about these ... any opinions?
        regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: language handlers in public schema?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Fixing r-tree semantics