Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Pavel Stehule
Тема Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Дата
Msg-id CAFj8pRASZBi2jv8QA6EvVGmhN6WzVz6tqMfW6nvRDd=UV1CxBA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers


čt 17. 12. 2020 v 19:49 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal:
Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> writes:
> While rebasing the jsonb patch I found out that the current subscripting
> assignment implementation in transformAssignmentIndirection always
> coerce the value to be assigned to the type which subscripting result
> suppose to have (refrestype). For arrays it's fine, since those two
> indeed must be the same, but for jsonb (and for hstore I guess too) the
> result of subscripting is always jsonb (well, text type) and the
> assigned value could be of some other type. This leads to assigning
> everything converted to text.

So ... what's the problem with that?  Seems like what you should put
in and what you should get out should be the same type.

I don't think so.  For  XML or JSON the target can be different, and it can safe one CAST

DECLARE
  n int;
  v varchar;
  js jsonb default '{"n": 100, "v" : "Hello"};
BEGIN
  n := js['n'];
  v := js['v'];

Can be nice to do this with a minimum number of transformations.

Regards

Pavel



We can certainly reconsider the API for the parsing hook if there's
really a good reason for these to be different types, but it seems
like that would just be encouraging poor design.

                        regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Следующее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposed patch for key managment