> Well, no. <@ is not a btree-indexable operator. Yes, but it's equivalent to ( ( a >= b1 or b1 is null ) and ( a < b2 or b2 is null ) ), which *is* btree-indexable and can use an index. So it seems like the kind of optimization we could eventually make. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
