On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Tomas Vondra <t...@fuzzy.cz> wrote: > I'm not awfully familiar with the GIN code, but based on Alexander's > feedback I presume fixing the GIN length limit (or rather removing it, > as it's a feature, not a bug) is quite straightforward. Why not to at > least consider that for 9.4, unless it turns more complex than expected?
Alexander said nothing about removing that limitation, or if he did I missed it. Which, as I said, I don't consider to be much of a limitation, because indexing the whole nested value doesn't mean it can satisfy a query on some more nested subset of an indexed value datum (i.e. a value in the sense of a value in a key/value pair). Alexander mentioned just indexing keys (object keys, or equivalently array elements at the jsonb level), which is a reasonable thing, but can be worked on later. I don't have much interest in working on making it possible to index elaborate nested values in key/value pairs, which is what you're suggesting if I've understood correctly. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
