Subject: Re: btree_gin and btree_gist for enums
To: Matt Wilmas <pgsql_lists@realplain.com>,
 PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
References: <56EA8A71.8060107@dunslane.net>
 <95B821E794D949A4B389C6A3F2F7AF16@pc1>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Message-ID: <56F46798.60605@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 18:18:00 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <95B821E794D949A4B389C6A3F2F7AF16@pc1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


On 03/24/2016 12:40 PM, Matt Wilmas wrote:
>
>
> It would be *really* nice to have this in 9.6.  It seems it's simply 
> filling out functionality that should already be there, right?  An 
> oversight/bug fix so it works "as advertised?" :-)


I think that would be stretching the process a bit far. I'm certainly 
not prepared to commit it unless there is a general consensus to make an 
exception for it.


> Is any other btree type-compatibility missing from these modules?  (I 
> notice the btree_gin docs don't mention "numeric," but it works.)


uuid would be another type that should be fairly easily covered but isn't.


>
>
> I just looked over the patch, and the actual code addition/changes 
> seem pretty small and straightforward (or am I wrong?). 


Yes, sure, it's all fairly simple. Took me a little while to understand 
what I was doing, but once I did it was pretty much plain sailing.

cheers

andrew


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers