Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:20:42AM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> >> On 23/04/14 00:40, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >>>> Where are we on the default JSONB opclass change?
>
> >>> FWIW, I still don't have any strong opinion here. I defer to others on
> >>> this question.
>
> >> I vote for changing it, even though neither option is ideal I think
> >> that given the nature of datatype the current default will break
> >> inserts for common usage pattern and that's much worse than not
> >> being able to use the index for some operators.
>
> > I agree. We should choose the most general option as the default.
>
> That seems to be the consensus, but now we need a name for the
> soon-to-be-not-default opclass. What's a good short adjective for it?
"comprehensive"? Not particularly short ...
According to Merriam Webster:
Synonymsall-embracing, all-in [chiefly British], all-inclusive,broad-gauge (or broad-gauged), compendious,
complete,encyclopedic,cover-all, cyclopedic, embracive, exhaustive,full, global, inclusive, in-depth, omnibus,
panoramic,thorough,universal
Related Wordsbroad, catholic, encyclical, general, inclusionary, overall;cosmic (also cosmical), extensive, far,
far-reaching,grand,large, panoptic, sweeping, vast, wide, wide-ranging; blanket,indiscriminate, unrestricted
jsonb_omnibus_ops ?
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services