Re: JSON output functions.
От | Stefan Keller |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JSON output functions. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFcOn29irgHpD6PPyx7oOb2qU1HUrVD51FA8e-8K9xE9kFG5Qg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: JSON output functions. (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: JSON output functions.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Andrew Nice work! Just for completeness: Did you also think of including geometry types in JSON output functions in later releases? There's a nice extension of JSON called GeoJSON for a starting point. Yours, Stefan 2012/2/3 Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>: > > > On 02/02/2012 12:20 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> >> 2012/2/2 Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>: >>> >>> >>> On 02/02/2012 04:35 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: >>>> >>>> At 2012-02-01 18:48:28 -0500, andrew.dunstan@pgexperts.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> For now I'm inclined not to proceed with that, and leave it as an >>>>> optimization to be considered later if necessary. Thoughts? >>>> >>>> I agree, there doesn't seem to be a pressing need to do it now. >>>> >>> >>> OK, here's my final version of the patch for constructor functions. If >>> there's no further comment I'll go with this. >> >> These function are super, Thank you >> >> Do you plan to fix a issue with row attribute names in 9.2? > > > > > Yeah. Tom did some initial work which he published here: > <http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/28413.1321500388%40sss.pgh.pa.us>, > noting: > > It's not really ideal with respect to > the ValuesScan case, because what you get seems to always be the > hard-wired "columnN" names for VALUES columns, even if you try to > override that with an alias > ... > Curiously, it works just fine if the VALUES can be folded > > and later he said: > > Upon further review, this patch would need some more work even for the > RowExpr case, because there are several places that build RowExprs > without bothering to build a valid colnames list. It's clearly soluble > if anyone cares to put in the work, but I'm not personally excited > enough to pursue it .. > > I'm going to look at that issue first, since the unfolded VALUES clause > seems like something of an obscure corner case. Feel free to chime in if you > can. > > > cheers > > > andrew > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: