Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jJK0a-0006GR-Vx for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:45:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jJK0Z-0000PC-R0 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:44:59 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jJK0Z-0000O0-KS for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:44:59 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jJK0X-0004Fv-FF for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 16:44:59 +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 02VGirKK014446; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 12:44:53 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Alexey Bashtanov cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Less-silly selectivity for JSONB matching operators In-reply-to: <7822136b-c4ab-7d5f-f7bc-8d59f03e4bbc@imap.cc> References: <12237.1582833074@sss.pgh.pa.us> <14469.1582927774@sss.pgh.pa.us> <8fcbdcc5-cbed-f96f-7ed4-f34d1bd1a205@imap.cc> <9233.1585671632@sss.pgh.pa.us> <7e87d82d-326a-a8df-ee4f-ec708c701dce@imap.cc> <9662.1585672165@sss.pgh.pa.us> <7822136b-c4ab-7d5f-f7bc-8d59f03e4bbc@imap.cc> Comments: In-reply-to Alexey Bashtanov message dated "Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:34:01 +0100" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <14444.1585673093.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 12:44:53 -0400 Message-ID: <14445.1585673093@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Alexey Bashtanov writes: >> I was wondering about DEFAULT_MATCHING_SEL. The difference in purpose >> from DEFAULT_MATCH_SEL wouldn't be too obvious, but then it probably >> wouldn't be anyway. > Fine with me, especially if both new functions are renamed accordingly. Yup, that would make sense, will do it like that. regards, tom lane