Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WXuzb-0006zL-Ku for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 16:04:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WXuza-0003Mw-TF for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 16:04:50 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:7903:4::125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WXuzY-0003JJ-Hn for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 16:04:48 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WXuzT-0000Im-5b for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 16:04:47 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s39G4Znx030994; Wed, 9 Apr 2014 12:04:35 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Alvaro Herrera cc: Robert Haas , Heikki Linnakangas , Andrew Dunstan , Peter Geoghegan , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) In-reply-to: <20140409155633.GW5822@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> References: <27299.1396989666@sss.pgh.pa.us> <28589.1396992841@sss.pgh.pa.us> <29030.1396993582@sss.pgh.pa.us> <534475B7.6020908@dunslane.net> <5344EAA4.1050605@vmware.com> <30137.1397057056@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140409155633.GW5822@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org> Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera message dated "Wed, 09 Apr 2014 12:56:33 -0300" Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 12:04:35 -0400 Message-ID: <30993.1397059475@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Alvaro Herrera writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> One other point here is that non-default opclasses can't be used in >> UNIQUE/PRIMARY KEY/EXCLUDE constraints, because there's no place to >> specify an opclass name in those syntaxes. UNIQUE/PRIMARY KEY don't >> matter here since these aren't btree opclasses, but is there a >> use-case for EXCLUDE with any of the supported jsonb operators? > That sounds like an oversight that could better be fixed in EXCLUDE, no? Well, there hasn't been a use-case up to now. I'm not sure there's one yet. 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