Re: jsonb array-style subscription
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2016-03-03T00:24:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.burovoy@gmail.com> writes: > I'd like to be a reviewer for the patch. It does not look big and very invasive. > Is it a final decision or it has a chance? If something there hurts > committers, it can end up as "Rejected with feedback" (since the patch > is already in the CF[1])? Well, it is pretty invasive, and I'm not sure anyone has bought in on the design. The problem I've got with it is that it's a one-off that embeds a whole lot of new parser/planner/executor infrastructure to serve exactly one datatype, ie jsonb. That does not seem like a good design approach, nor in keeping with the way Postgres usually goes at things. If the patch were proposing a similar amount of new infrastructure to support some datatype-extensible concept of subscripting, I'd be much happier about it. I believe there's been some handwaving in the past about extensible approaches to subscripting, though I haven't got time to troll the archives for it right now. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Throw error when assigning jsonb scalar instead of a composite object
- aa6e46daf530 14.0 landed
-
Filling array gaps during jsonb subscripting
- 81fcc72e6622 14.0 landed
-
Implementation of subscripting for jsonb
- 676887a3b0b8 14.0 landed