Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZQGZyqSBzaFZ4gmtnQZpcXLE=ceUL_O29gtMgnP=AvC+g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Call for GIST/GIN/SP-GIST opclass documentation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I just created sections in the SGML manual chapters about GIST, GIN, and
> SP-GIST to hold documentation about the standard opclasses provided for
> them:

I think that that's a good idea. I too was bothered by this omission.

>     Of the two operator classes for type jsonb, jsonb_ops is the
>     default. jsonb_hash_ops supports fewer operators but will work with
>     larger indexed values than jsonb_ops can support.
>
> Is that accurate?  Do we need to say more?

Well, I'm not sure that it's worth noting there, but as you probably
already know jsonb_hash_ops will perform a lot better than the default
GIN opclass, and will have much smaller indexes. FWIW I think that the
size limitation is overblown, and performance is in fact the
compelling reason to prefer jsonb_hash_ops, although it's probably
incongruous to explain the issues that way in this section of the
docs. It probably suffices that that is covered in the "JSON Types"
section.

--
Peter Geoghegan


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: GiST support for inet datatypes
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: psql \d+ and oid display