On May 22, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > It seems probably workable given that we expect the pending list to be > of fairly constrained size. However, the commit message referenced > upthread also muttered darkly about GIN's partial match logic not working > in amgettuple. I do not recall the details of that issue, but unless we > can solve that one too, there's not much use in fixing this one.
Well, what about a GiST operator family/class for arrays? Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
