Re: dlgOperator_patch

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Saito [mailto:saito(at)inetrt(dot)skcapi(dot)co(dot)jp]
> Sent: 10 September 2003 03:24
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] dlgOperator_patch
>
>
> > This is one that is not in pga2 - any ideas?
>
> MERGES is specified tacitly.
> Default name in the preparation is put.
> I don't think that it is a problem that it doesn't have
> chkbox.

I think it has as much right to be there as HASHES, however whilst there
is a oprcanhash column in pg_operator, there is no oprcanmerge column.
So what defines a mergeable operator?

> However, are LTCMP, GTCMP necessary?

Yes, I think so. You can specify them when you create an operator (they
are shown as < operator and > operator btw.).

Regards, Dave.