Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qhG9U-001rly-QC for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:15:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qhG9T-003QpP-6m for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:14:59 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qhG9S-003Qp4-SY for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:14:58 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qhG9M-004mhI-7s for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:14:57 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 38FLEjLZ3802533; Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:14:45 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: "David E. Wheeler" cc: Erik Rijkers , Erik Wienhold , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: JSON Path and GIN Questions In-reply-to: References: <15DD78A5-B5C4-4332-ACFE-55723259C07F@justatheory.com> <133696180.303713.1694566807910@office.mailbox.org> <640942d7-c996-0562-62c9-d69a4c1f9b1e@xs4all.nl> <3063408.1694666518@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to "David E. Wheeler" message dated "Fri, 15 Sep 2023 16:13:22 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3802531.1694812485.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:14:45 -0400 Message-ID: <3802532.1694812485@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk "David E. Wheeler" writes: > On Sep 14, 2023, at 00:41, Tom Lane wrote: >> As far as json in particular is concerned, 8.14.4 jsonb Indexing [4] >> is pretty clear about what is or is not supported. > How do you feel about this note, then? I think it's unnecessary. If we did consider it necessary, why wouldn't just about every subsection in chapter 8 need similar wording? regards, tom lane