Hi, On 2019-01-21 15:21:29 -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote: > As a practical matter, most of the exact-test functions have a > preamble that checks the bbox, so in the seqscan case having the > operator along for the ride isn’t any advantage. In any event, if we > do have exact tests w/o a lossy preamble, we could add that for v12, > as this renovation won’t be a small one if we go this direction.
How expensive are the bbox checks in comparison to the exact tests? IOW, how much of a problem is it to potentially do a bbox check twice? Greetings, Andres Freund
