Re: SQL/JSON features for v15
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>,
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>,
Nikita Glukhov <n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2022-08-31T16:04:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2022-08-31 10:20:24 -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: >> Andres, Robert, Tom: With this recent work, have any of your opinions >> changed on including SQL/JSON in v15? > I don't really know what to do here. It feels blatantly obvious that this code > isn't even remotely close to being releasable. I'm worried about the impact of > the big revert at this stage of the release cycle, and that's not getting > better by delaying further. And I'm getting weary of being asked to make the > obvious call that the authors of this feature as well as the RMT should have > made a while ago. I have to agree. There is a large amount of code at stake here. We're being asked to review a bunch of hastily-produced patches to that code on an even more hasty schedule (and personally I have other things I need to do today...) I think the odds of a favorable end result are small. > From my POV the only real discussion is whether we'd want to revert this in 15 > and HEAD or just 15. There's imo a decent point to be made to just revert in > 15 and aggressively press forward with the changes posted in this thread. I'm not for that. Code that we don't think is ready to ship has no business being in the common tree, nor does it make review any easier to be looking at one bulky set of already-committed patches and another bulky set of deltas. I'm okay with making an exception for the include/nodes/ and backend/nodes/ files in HEAD, since the recent changes in that area mean it'd be a lot of error-prone work to produce a reverting patch there. We can leave those in as dead code temporarily, I think. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
JSON_TABLE: Add support for NESTED paths and columns
- bb766cde63b4 17.0 landed
-
Add basic JSON_TABLE() functionality
- de3600452b61 17.0 landed
-
Add SQL/JSON query functions
- 6185c9737cf4 17.0 landed
-
Add soft error handling to some expression nodes
- aaaf9449ec6b 17.0 landed
-
Adjust populate_record_field() to handle errors softly
- 1edb3b491bee 17.0 landed
-
Refactor code used by jsonpath executor to fetch variables
- faa2b953ba3b 17.0 landed
-
Add more SQL/JSON constructor functions
- 03734a7fed7d 17.0 landed
-
SQL/JSON: support the IS JSON predicate
- 6ee30209a6f1 16.0 landed
-
SQL/JSON: add standard JSON constructor functions
- 7081ac46ace8 16.0 landed
-
Revert SQL/JSON features
- 96ef3237bf74 15.0 landed
- 2f2b18bd3f55 16.0 landed
-
Numeric error suppression in jsonpath
- 16d489b0fe05 12.0 cited