Re: Tackling JsonPath support
| От | Christian Convey |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Tackling JsonPath support |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAPfS4ZyeGBZa4fCKu=d4hTa3CTjFgYRE_zEeS+F3B2Xao3EWNw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Tackling JsonPath support (Christian Convey <christian.convey@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Tackling JsonPath support
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote
> I thought by adding my first implementation to "contrib", we could make this functionality available to end-users, even before there was a consensus about what PG's "official" JSON-related operators should have for syntax and semantics.
>this time the commiters dislike the contrib dir. It is hard to push there anything :-(. You can try it, but it can be lost time.
Thanks for the warning. I'm okay with my patch adding the "json_path" function to the core PG code.
I would still suggest that we hold off on having my first patch implement an official JSON-related operator such as "JSON_TABLE". I would prefer to have my "json_path" function available to users even before we know how "JSON_TABLE", etc. should behave.
Does that sound reasonable?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: