Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> (BTW, wasn't there some discussion of changing our minds about which
> one is the default? We already have one bug report complaining about
> jsonb_ops' size restriction, so that seems to be evidence in favor
> of changing ...)

Yes, there was. I very nearly came down on the side of making
jsonb_hash_ops the default, but given that it doesn't make all
operators indexable, I ultimately decided against supporting that
course of action. I thought that that would be an odd limitation for
the default GIN opclass to have. It was a very close call in my mind,
and if you favor changing the default now, in light of the few
complaints we've heard, I think that's a reasonable decision. That
said, as I noted in the main -bugs thread, the case presented is
fairly atypical.

--
Peter Geoghegan