On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 3:17 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> We've known about this for, um, decades: btree_gist's support for
> inet/cidr is fundamentally broken [1][2]. It's still there
> only because nobody's been able to think of a way of removing it
> without causing pain for anyone who has indexes like that.
> But maybe we should just accept that it's going to cause pain
> and remove it.
I think correctness should take priority over avoiding pain.
Thanks
Richard