On Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Thom Brown wrote:
On 7 June 2012 12:52, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
I know Oleg has been discussing quad trees for years now, so SP-GIST
sounds like a great feature.
The docs on SP-GIST simply suggest people read the code, which
On 7 June 2012 12:52, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I know Oleg has been discussing quad trees for years now, so SP-GIST
>> sounds like a great feature.
>>
>> The docs on SP-GIST simply suggest people read the code, which is way
>> below our normal sta
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I know Oleg has been discussing quad trees for years now, so SP-GIST
> sounds like a great feature.
>
> The docs on SP-GIST simply suggest people read the code, which is way
> below our normal standard of documentation.
I completely agree. The
On Thursday, June 7, 2012, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I know Oleg has been discussing quad trees for years now, so SP-GIST
> sounds like a great feature.
>
> The docs on SP-GIST simply suggest people read the code, which is way
> below our normal standard of documentation.
>
It's the same we have for n
I know Oleg has been discussing quad trees for years now, so SP-GIST
sounds like a great feature.
The docs on SP-GIST simply suggest people read the code, which is way
below our normal standard of documentation.
CREATE INDEX contains no examples involving SP-GIST indexes.
It seems likely that th
