Re: GiST a second class citizen?

Paul Ramsey <pramsey(at)refractions(dot)net> writes:
> So far, GiST is integrated into the main tree, but all the bindings seem
> to be kept outside, in contrib (ltree, btree, rtree).

This is a historical artifact. As GiST comes more up-to-speed, the
operator classes for it should become mainstream.

> Would I be completely out-to-lunch if I suggested that the GiST
> bindings might even replace the standard ones?

Yes. There is no "replacement" involved here, because opclasses for
different index types are quite independent.

(Perhaps what you are really suggesting is that GiST should become the
default index type instead of btree --- to which I can only reply that
it's got a *long* way to go before that would be considered for an
instant...)

regards, tom lane