MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5344EAA4.1050605@vmware.com>
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> <5344EAA4.1050605@vmware.com>
From: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 18:57:50 +0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAPpHfdtFpdYQXFJP+EnZMjfdz-1ARaaAJgHZX+-pdHyyjuMS-w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for
 GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>,
 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2a24043b44604f69d5452
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

--001a11c2a24043b44604f69d5452
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com
> wrote:

> The ship has cleatly sailed to add parameterized opclasses to 9.4, but
> let's keep it in mind when we decide on the defaults.
>
> In the absence of parameterizable opclasses, it would be much more
> flexible to have opclasses that index, keys, values, key-value pairs and
> paths separately, instead of the current json_ops and json_hash_ops
> opclasses which index all of those in the same index. That way, if you only
> e.g. ever query on the existence of a key, you'd only need to index the
> keys.
>
> I don't understand how we ended up with the current dichotomy of json_ops
> and json_hash_ops...


+1 for parameterizable opclasses

------
With best regards,
Alexander Korotkov.

--001a11c2a24043b44604f69d5452
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On W=
ed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:hlinnakangas@vmware.com" target=3D"_blank">hlinnakangas@vmware=
.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-=
left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;p=
adding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"">The ship has cleatly sailed to add paramet=
erized opclasses to 9.4, but let&#39;s keep it in mind when we decide on th=
e defaults.<br>

</div>
<br>
In the absence of parameterizable opclasses, it would be much more flexible=
 to have opclasses that index, keys, values, key-value pairs and paths sepa=
rately, instead of the current json_ops and json_hash_ops opclasses which i=
ndex all of those in the same index. That way, if you only e.g. ever query =
on the existence of a key, you&#39;d only need to index the keys.<br>


<br>
I don&#39;t understand how we ended up with the current dichotomy of json_o=
ps and json_hash_ops...</blockquote><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br></div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_quote">+1 for parameterizable opclasses</div><br>------<b=
r>

With best regards,<br>Alexander Korotkov. </div></div></div>

--001a11c2a24043b44604f69d5452--