Re: More new SQL/JSON item methods

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

To: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan.chalke@enterprisedb.com>

Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2024-01-17T19:33:14Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Rationalize and improve error messages for some jsonpath items
- 92d2ab7554f9 17.0 landed
Clean up a bug in sql/json items commit 66ea94e8e6
- 06a66d87dbc7 17.0 landed
Implement various jsonpath methods
- 66ea94e8e606 17.0 cited
Reorganise jsonpath operators and methods
- 283a95da9236 17.0 landed
Add numeric_int8_opt_error() to optionally suppress errors
- c1b9e1e56d8c 17.0 landed

On 17.01.24 10:03, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
> I added unary '+' and '-' support as well and thus thought of having 
> separate rules altogether rather than folding those in.
> 
>     Per SQL standard, the precision and scale arguments are unsigned
>     integers, so unary plus and minus signs are not supported.  So my patch
>     removes that support, but I didn't adjust the regression tests for that.
> 
> 
> However, PostgreSQL numeric casting does support a negative scale. Here 
> is an example:
> 
> # select '12345'::numeric(4,-2);
>   numeric
> ---------
>     12300
> (1 row)
> 
> And thus thought of supporting those.
> Do we want this JSON item method to behave differently here?

Ok, it would make sense to support this in SQL/JSON as well.

> I will merge them all into one and will try to keep them in the order 
> specified in sql_features.txt.
> However, for documentation, it makes more sense to keep them in logical 
> order than the alphabetical one. What are your views on this?

The documentation can be in a different order.