From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: jsonb existence queries are misimplemented by jsonb_ops |
Date: | 2014-05-07 20:47:54 |
Message-ID: | 4616.1399495674@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Another idea would be to change the definition of the exists operator
> so that it *does* look into sub-objects. It seems rather random to me
> that containment looks into sub-objects but exists doesn't. However,
> possibly there are good reasons for the non-orthogonality.
No, wait, containment *doesn't* look into sub-objects:
regression=# select * from j where f1 @> '{"foo": {"bar": "baz"}}';
f1
-------------------------
{"foo": {"bar": "baz"}}
(1 row)
regression=# select * from j where f1 @> '{"bar": "baz"}';
f1
----
(0 rows)
This is rather surprising in view of the way that section 8.14.4
goes on about nesting. But I guess the user-facing docs for jsonb
are in little better shape than the internal docs.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-05-07 20:48:18 | Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-05-07 20:40:19 | Re: 9.4 checksum errors in recovery with gin index |