| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | andrew(at)supernews(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fixing r-tree semantics |
| Date: | 2005-06-24 00:13:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20453.1119571985@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> writes:
> On 2005-06-23, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> 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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-24 00:18:53 | pgsql: Fix rtree and contrib/rtree_gist search behavior for the 1-D box |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-06-24 00:01:31 | language handlers in public schema? |