On 12/08/2014 01:00 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 12/08/2014 04:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here is a new patch version that
* uses find_coercion_path() to find the cast function if any, as
discussed elsewhere
* removes calls to getTypeOutputInfo() except
On 12/12/2014 01:10 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 12/08/2014 01:00 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 12/08/2014 04:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here is a new patch version that
* uses find_coercion_path() to find the cast function if any, as
discussed elsewhere
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Also here is a patch factored out which applies the
find_coercion_pathway change to json.c. I'm inclined to say we should
backpatch this to 9.4 (and with a small change 9.3). Thoughts?
Meh. Maybe I'm just feeling gunshy because I broke something
On 12/12/2014 01:55 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
Also here is a patch factored out which applies the
find_coercion_pathway change to json.c. I'm inclined to say we should
backpatch this to 9.4 (and with a small change 9.3). Thoughts?
Meh. Maybe I'm just
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here is a new patch version that
* uses find_coercion_path() to find the cast function if any, as
discussed elsewhere
* removes calls to getTypeOutputInfo() except where required
* honors a cast to json only for rendering both json and jsonb
* adds
On 12/08/2014 04:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
OK, here is a new patch version that
* uses find_coercion_path() to find the cast function if any, as
discussed elsewhere
* removes calls to getTypeOutputInfo() except where required
* honors a cast to json only
On 10/28/2014 09:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 10/27/2014 05:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Anyway this whole business of searching through the CASTSOURCETARGET
syscache seems like it could be refactored. If I'm counting correctly,
that block now appears four times (three in this patch,
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This bit:
+/*
+ * Determine how we want to render values of a given type in datum_to_jsonb.
+ *
+ * Given the datatype OID, return its JsonbTypeCategory, as well as the
type's
+ * output function OID. If the returned category is JSONBTYPE_CAST, we
+ * return the
On 10/27/2014 05:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
This bit:
+/*
+ * Determine how we want to render values of a given type in datum_to_jsonb.
+ *
+ * Given the datatype OID, return its JsonbTypeCategory, as well as the type's
+ * output function OID. If the returned
On 10/15/2014 03:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I checked a code, and I have only two small objection - a name
jsonb_object_two_arg is not good - maybe json_object_keys_values ?
It's consistent with the existing json_object_two_arg. In all cases I
think I kept the names the same except for
Hi
2014-10-27 15:33 GMT+01:00 Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net:
On 10/15/2014 03:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I checked a code, and I have only two small objection - a name
jsonb_object_two_arg is not good - maybe json_object_keys_values ?
It's consistent with the existing
2014-10-15 23:49 GMT+02:00 Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net:
On 10/15/2014 05:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If we really want to change the name of json_object_two_arg, it
would probably be best to change it NOW in 9.4 before it gets out
into a production release
2014-10-13 17:22 GMT+02:00 Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net:
On 10/13/2014 09:37 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/26/2014 04:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb that
we didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4. They are all
On 10/15/2014 07:38 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-10-13 17:22 GMT+02:00 Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net
mailto:and...@dunslane.net:
On 10/13/2014 09:37 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/26/2014 04:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator
On 10/15/2014 03:54 PM, I wrote:
On 10/15/2014 07:38 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
I checked a code, and I have only two small objection - a name
jsonb_object_two_arg is not good - maybe json_object_keys_values ?
It's consistent with the existing json_object_two_arg. In all cases I
think I
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If we really want to change the name of json_object_two_arg, it
would probably be best to change it NOW in 9.4 before it gets out
into a production release at all.
Doesn't it require initdb? If so, I think it's too late now.
--
Álvaro Herrera
On 10/15/2014 05:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If we really want to change the name of json_object_two_arg, it
would probably be best to change it NOW in 9.4 before it gets out
into a production release at all.
Doesn't it require initdb? If so, I think it's too late
On 09/26/2014 04:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb
that we didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4. They are all
equivalents of the similarly names json functions. Included are
to_jsonb
jsonb_build_object
On 10/13/2014 09:37 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 09/26/2014 04:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb
that we didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4. They are all
equivalents of the similarly names json functions. Included are
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb that
we didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4. They are all equivalents
of the similarly names json functions. Included are
to_jsonb
jsonb_build_object
jsonb_build_array
jsonb_object
jsonb_agg
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb that we
didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4.
That's cool, but I hope someone revisits adding a concatenate
operator. That's a biggest omission
On 09/26/2014 05:00 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Here is a patch for the generator and aggregate functions for jsonb that we
didn't manage to get done in time for 9.4.
That's cool, but I hope someone revisits adding a
22 matches
Mail list logo
