X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36AE9D712A
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:25:09 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 95360-01
	for <pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:25:05 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9C6D6E11
	for <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 18:25:04 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j7SLOvH5026889;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:24:57 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Ilia Kantor" <ilia@obnovlenie.ru>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: intarray is broken ? (8.1b1) 
In-reply-to: <auto-000558490720@umail.ru> 
References: <auto-000558490720@umail.ru>
Comments: In-reply-to "Ilia Kantor" <ilia@obnovlenie.ru>
	message dated "Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:41:18 +0400"
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:24:57 -0400
Message-ID: <26888.1125264297@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.006 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.006]
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200508/490
X-Sequence-Number: 14237

"Ilia Kantor" <ilia@obnovlenie.ru> writes:
> Looks like GIST indexes for intarray give no statistic at all.

Feel free to contribute some stats routines that aren't stubs ...

			regards, tom lane