On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 10:38:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Works for me.
Thanks for checking, applied that.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Michael Paquier writes:
> I don't have a strong opinion about the naming inconsistency between
> the opclass name and the opfamily name in this case, though, couldn't
> it create more problems than actually fix something?
Well, it's been like that from day one and people haven't complained.
I thi
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 03:22:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wonder whether we shouldn't just revert this table to
> showing opclass names, and avert our eyes from the theoretical
> inconsistency. Michael, looks like it was your 7a1cd5260
> that changed it; what do you think?
Yes, the docs shoul
> This naming was evidently chosen to match btree,
> which has both inet_ops and cidr_ops opclasses
> within its network_ops family.
> spgist only supports inet_ops
FWIW, the documentation for GIST has inet_ops in the equivalent table, so it
was extra-confusing because I thought SP-GIST's inconsi
PG Doc comments form writes:
> I wanted to add an SP-GIST index for an inet field ip_address
> In https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/spgist-builtin-opclasses.html
> network_ops is stated as the built-in opclass for (inet, inet)
> I entered the following command:
> # create index concurrently ip_ad
Michael, please see below:
On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:44 PM PG Doc comments form <
nore...@postgresql.org> wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/14/spgist-builtin-opclasses.html
> Description:
>
> I wanted to add an
