public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
To: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Gavin Flower <[email protected]>
Cc: David E. Wheeler <[email protected]>
Cc: Greg Stark <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 16:32:01 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-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 <[email protected]> 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


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

view thread (65+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox