From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST
 opclass documentation)
In-reply-to: <534475B7.6020908@dunslane.net>
References: <27299.1396989666@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAM3SWZQGZyqSBzaFZ4gmtnQZpcXLE=ceUL_O29gtMgnP=AvC+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <28589.1396992841@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAM3SWZRAxisGCdODhbgeiNL6tayqL18XMzun4W3xesASmKfwDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <29030.1396993582@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAM3SWZQzOxmryVe_bdu9WhqbJTBoiqM7knvKm0oRYxvfsFnz7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <534475B7.6020908@dunslane.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
 message dated "Tue, 08 Apr 2014 18:18:31 -0400"
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 22:48:32 -0400
Message-ID: <2742.1397011712@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> On 04/08/2014 05:57 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> ... I didn't propose changing the default due to
>> concerns about the POLA, but I'm happy to be told that those concerns
>> were out of proportion to the practical benefits of a different
>> default.

> I tend to agree with Tom that POLA will be more violated by the default 
> ops class not being able to index some values.

We should wait a bit longer to see if anyone objects, but assuming that
this represents the consensus opinion ...

ISTM that the name "jsonb_ops" should have pride of place as the default
jsonb opclass.  Therefore, if we make this change, jsonb_hash_ops needs to
be renamed to jsonb_ops, and we need a new name for what is now jsonb_ops.
I haven't paid attention to the technical details of the differences so
I have no idea what to suggest for the new name.  Thoughts?

			regards, tom lane


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