Tom Lane writes: > Andreas Seltenreich <seltenre...@gmx.de> writes: >> Peter Geoghegan writes: >>> It's surprising that SQL Smith didn't catch something with such simple >>> steps to reproduce. > >> I removed distinct relatively early because it causes a large part of >> queries to fail due to it not finding an equality operator it likes. It >> seems to be more picky about the equality operator than, say, joins. >> I'm sure it has a good reason to do so? > > It's looking for an operator that is known to be semantically equality, > by virtue of being the equality member of a btree or hash opclass. > Type path has no such opclass unfortunately.
As do lots of data types in the regression db while still having an operator providing semantic equivalence. I was hoping for someone to question that status quo. Naively I'd say an equivalence flag is missing in the catalog that is independent of opclasses. regards Andreas -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
