Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set
От
Michael Paquier
Тема
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set
Дата
Msg-id
20200129114933.GJ145179@paquier.xyz
Ответ на
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set (Magnus Hagander)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:54:23AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 4:36 PM Robert Haas wrote: >> Another thing that would be nice is to warn about commits that don't >> include a "Description:" line. I have been trying to be religious >> about that, but I seem to periodically apostatize. I had to look at a dictionary for this one.. > We'd also have to come to this magic actual agreement on which such > fields we *want* :) Which alone would be an improvement. Well, there has been some discussion about this matter on the lists not so long ago: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CABUevEzauoMm3irCyg4s=vUX5hUcKmTW_R69fiKS4+72gzyAOw@mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+hUKGJR+YtZUdq9_6cFsqCRH_fvfumdDZgmiLwXBHCrTJUGmw@mail.gmail.com And it seems to me that the only consensus we reached was about having "Discussion:", while the other tags were not that popular. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления