| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
| Date: | 2014-05-06 20:18:50 |
| Message-ID: | 16769.1399407530@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 08:50:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>>> Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change?
>> Not sure. I'm for changing it, I think, but it wasn't at all clear
>> that we had consensus on that. We did not have a proposed new name
>> for the opclass either ...
> Where are we on this question?
Stuck on the naming question. I'd be willing to do the patch legwork
if we had a consensus (or even a proposal) for what to rename the
current jsonb_ops to.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-05-06 21:20:20 | Re: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-05-06 20:10:49 | Re: Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-06 20:24:20 | Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-05-06 20:18:11 | Re: Wanted: jsonb on-disk representation documentation |