Horton

Re: Missing docs on AT TIME ZONE precedence?

Shay Rojansky <roji@roji.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Shay Rojansky <roji@roji.org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-11-26T17:45:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
>> Is there a missing line in the operator precedence table in the docs?
>
> I think the big question is whether AT TIME ZONE is significant enough
> to list there because there are many other clauses we could potentially
> add there.

Just to give more context, I'm a maintainer on Entity Framework Core (the
.NET ORM), and this caused the provider to generate incorrect SQL etc.

If you decide to not have a comprehensive operator precedence table (though
I do hope you do), I'd at least amend the "any other operator" and "all
other native and user-defined operators" to clearly indicate that some
operators aren't listed and have undocumented precedences, so implementers
can at least be aware and test the unlisted ones etc.

Commits

  1. Clean up usage of bison precedence for non-operator keywords.

  2. Doc: list AT TIME ZONE and COLLATE in operator precedence table.

  3. SQL/JSON: support the IS JSON predicate