Great. Thanks for refactoring it further and fixing other bugs in there
(and making it more clean too)!
Regards,
Ade
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:18 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > I'm inclined to back-patch this. Given how fuzzy the definition
> > of gin_fuzzy_search_limit is, it seems unlikely that anyone would
> > be depending on the current buggy behavior.
>
> And done. Thanks for the bug report and patch!
>
> regards, tom lane
>