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:

Reply via email to