| From: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
| Date: | 2014-04-09 14:57:50 |
| Message-ID: | CAPpHfdtFpdYQXFJP+EnZMjfdz-1ARaaAJgHZX+-pdHyyjuMS-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com
> wrote:
> The ship has cleatly sailed to add parameterized opclasses to 9.4, but
> let's keep it in mind when we decide on the defaults.
>
> In the absence of parameterizable opclasses, it would be much more
> flexible to have opclasses that index, keys, values, key-value pairs and
> paths separately, instead of the current json_ops and json_hash_ops
> opclasses which index all of those in the same index. That way, if you only
> e.g. ever query on the existence of a key, you'd only need to index the
> keys.
>
> I don't understand how we ended up with the current dichotomy of json_ops
> and json_hash_ops...
+1 for parameterizable opclasses
------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2014-04-09 15:12:31 | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
| Previous Message | Tomáš Greif | 2014-04-09 12:17:34 | Add link to partial unique index from Constraints (5.3) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-09 15:08:49 | Re: Get more from indices. |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2014-04-09 14:57:32 | Re: New option in pg_basebackup to exclude pg_log files during base backup |