Re: default opclass for jsonb (was Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation)

+1
but bit confused with json instead of jsonb

On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
> On 05/10/2014 04:42 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> The main difference between the two opclasses from a user's standpoint is
>> not whether they hash or not. The big difference is that one indexes
>> complete paths from the root, and the other indexes just the "leaf" level.
>> For example, if you have an object like '{"foo": {"bar": 123 } }', one will
>> index "foo", "foo->bar", and "foo->bar->123" while the other will index
>> "foo", "bar" and "123".
>>
>> Whether the opclasses use hashing to shorten the key is an orthogonal
>> property, and IMHO not as important. To reflect that, I suggest that we name
>> the opclasses:
>>
>> json_path_ops
>> json_value_ops
>>
>> or something along those lines.
>>
>>
>
>
> That looks like the first suggestion I've actually liked and that users will
> be able to understand.
>
> cheers
>
> andrew
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers