Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength

From: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski <me(at)komzpa(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rethinking opclass member checks and dependency strength
Date: 2019-08-09 14:19:35
Message-ID: CAC8Q8tKYcE2JU6Whz2hqo1H9tY1zM26yf99RnDFgTGRiCNfskQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> But none of our contrib modules do it like that, and I'd lay long odds
> against any third party code doing it either.

Thoughts?
>

PostGIS has some rarely used box operations as part of GiST opclass, like
"overabove".

These are source of misunderstanding, as it hinges on the fact that
non-square geometry will be coerced into a box on a call, which is not
obvious when you call it on something like diagonal linestrings.
It may happen that we will decide to remove them. On such circumstances, I
expect that ALTER OPERATOR CLASS DROP OPERATOR will work.

Other thing that I would expect is that DROP FUNCTION ... CASCADE will
remove the operator and unregister the operator from operator class without
dropping operator class itself.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2019-08-09 14:27:45 Re: SQL/JSON path: collation for comparisons, minor typos in docs
Previous Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-08-09 14:07:00 Re: Global temporary tables