=?UTF-8?B?SmFuIFVyYmHFhHNraQ==?= <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org> writes:
> OK, now it works flawlessly as far as I can tell. Will mark it as Ready
> for Committer.

Applied with mostly-stylistic corrections, plus addition of
documentation and a minimal regression test.

I did *not* apply this bit:

>> 2) I found gist index not very useful with default SIGLENINT = 3. I've
>> changed this value to 15 and I found gist index performs very good on
>> dictionary. But on longer strings greater values of SIGLENINT may be
>> required (probably even SIGLENINT > 122 will give benefit in some cases in
>> spite of TOAST).

AFAICT that would break on-disk compatibility of pg_trgm GIST indexes.
I don't believe we have adequate evidence to justify doing that, and
in any case it ought to be a separate patch rather than buried inside a
mostly unrelated feature patch.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: wildcard search support for pg_trgm at 2011-01-30 22:24:51 from Jan Urbański

Responses

• Re: wildcard search support for pg_trgm at 2011-02-01 08:16:16 from Alexander Korotkov

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2011-02-01 02:53:01
	Subject: Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases)
Previous:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2011-02-01 02:36:58
	Subject: Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases)