From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, 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>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, "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: | 2014-05-09 14:32:01 |
Message-ID: | 20140509143201.GF30231@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-05-09 10:26:48 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 09:53:36AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 07:04:17AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz> writes:
> > > > On 09/05/14 15:34, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > >> Looks good. I was thinking the jsonb_ops name could remain unchanged
> > > >> and the jsonb_hash_ops could be called jsonb_combo_ops as it combines
> > > >> the key and value into a single index entry.
> > >
> > > > If you have 'jsonb_combo_ops' - then surely 'jsonb_op' should be called
> > > > 'jsonb_xxx_ops', where the 'xxx' distinguishes that from
> > > > 'jsonb_combo_ops'? I guess, if any appropriate wording of 'xxx' was too
> > > > cumbersome, then it would be worse.
> > >
> > > Yeah, I'm disinclined to change the opclass names now. It's not apparent
> > > to me that "combo" is a better choice than "hash" for the second opclass.
> >
> > Well, if we are optionally hashing json_ops for long strings, what does
> > jsonb_hash_ops do uniquely with hashing? Does it always hash, while
> > json_ops optionally hashes? Is that the distinguishing characteristic?
> > It seemed the _content_ of the indexed value was more important, rather
> > than the storage method.
>
> Also, are people going to think that jsonb_hash_ops creates a hash
> index, which is not crash safe, even though it is a GIN index? Do we
> have this "hash" confusion anywhere else?
The operator class has to be specified after the USING GIN in CREATE
INDEX so I think that rest is neglegible.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-09 20:44:32 | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-05-09 14:26:48 | Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-05-09 14:49:09 | Re: A couple logical decoding fixes/patches |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-05-09 14:31:37 | Re: Cache lookup error when using jsonb, json_build_object and a WITH clause |