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)?
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 (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers