It's easy to add support of other operations to hash_ops, so it will be on par with default GIN opclass, at the price of bigger size. We can add it later to contrib/jsonbext.
I'm mostly worrying about changing semantics of scalar. On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> What did you decide about hashing values in indexes vs. putting them in >> literally? > > There are two GIN opclasses supplied. There is a default, which > supports more operators (various "existence" operators - see the > documentation). There is an alternative called jsonb_hash_ops that > only supports containment, and performs considerably better than the > default. Containment *is* the compelling operator to support, though - > you can do rather a lot with it. This must be what you're referring > to, since I recall you blogged about the response it got at pgConf.EU. > Both are available. > > > -- > 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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
