From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
Date: | 2014-05-06 22:29:40 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZS4Tn-xZOBqM_ds-nhB2wLSpKG86rcJnMSexqDJqWgzNg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I wonder whether the most effective use of time at this point
> wouldn't be to fix jsonb_ops to do that, rather than arguing about
> what to rename it to. If it didn't have the failure-for-long-strings
> problem I doubt anybody would be unhappy about making it the default.
I would expect the selectivity of keys on their own to be very low
with idiomatic usage of jsonb. Typically, every row in a table will
have almost the same keys. The current default opclass makes more
sense for when that isn't the case.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-06 22:39:37 | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-06 22:20:53 | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-05-06 22:37:40 | Re: Wanted: jsonb on-disk representation documentation |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-06 22:28:32 | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |