> The short-term workaround for Rusty is probably to create his GIN
> index using the intarray-provided gin__int_ops opclass. But it
Right
> seems to me that we ought to get rid of intarray's @> and <@ operators
> and have the module depend on the core anyarray operators, just as we
> have already done for = and <>. Comments?
Agree, will do. Although built-in anyarray operators have ~N^2 behaviour while
intarray's version - only N*log(N)
--
Teodor Sigaev E-mail: [email protected]
WWW: http://www.sigaev.ru/
