Vitaly Burovoy <vitaly.buro...@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
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
