Re: SQL/JSON: functions

Attached 45th version of the patches.

Nodes JsonFormat, JsonReturning, JsonPassing, JsonBehavior were fixed.

On 17.03.2020 21:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> út 17. 3. 2020 v 1:55 odesílatel Nikita Glukhov
> <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru <mailto:n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>> napsal:
>
> Attached 44th version of the patches.
>
>
> On 12.03.2020 16:41, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> On 12.03.2020 00:09 Nikita Glukhov wrote:
>>
>> Attached 43rd version of the patches.
>>
>> The previous patch #4 ("Add function formats") was removed.
>> Instead, introduced new executor node JsonCtorExpr which is used to wrap
>> SQL/JSON constructor function calls (FuncExpr, Aggref, WindowFunc).
>>
>> Also, JsonIsPredicate node began to be used as executor node.
>> This helped to remove unnecessary json[b]_is_valid() user functions.
>>
>>
>> It looks very well - all tests passed, code looks well.
>>
>> Now, when there are special nodes, then the introduction of
>> COERCE_INTERNAL_CAST is not necessary, and it is only my one and
>> last objection again this patch's set.
>>
> I have removed patch #3 with COERCE_INTERNAL_CAST too.
>
> Coercions in JsonValueExpr in JsonCtorExpr, which were previously hidden with
> COERCE_INTERNAL_CAST and which were outputted as RETURNING or FORMAT JSON
> clauses, now moved into separate expressions.
>
> I am looking on the code, and although the code is correct it doesn't
> look well (consistently with other node types).
>
> I think so JsonFormat and JsonReturning should be node types, not just
> structs. If these types will be nodes, then you can simplify
> _readJsonExpr and all node operations on this node.

JsonFormat and JsonReturning was transformed into nodes, and not included
directly into other nodes now.

> User functions json[b]_build_object_ext() and json[b]_build_array_ext() also
> can be easily removed. But it seems harder to remove new aggregate functions
> json[b]_objectagg() and json[b]_agg_strict(), because they can't be called
> directly from JsonCtorExpr node.
>
>
> I don't see reasons for another reduction now. Can be great if you can
> finalize work what you plan for pg13.
>

> +<->READ_ENUM_FIELD(on_error.btype, JsonBehaviorType);
> +<->READ_NODE_FIELD(on_error.default_expr);
> +<->READ_ENUM_FIELD(on_empty.btype, JsonBehaviorType);
> +<->READ_NODE_FIELD(on_empty.default_expr);
>
> JsonBehavior is node type. Then why you don't write just
>
> READ_NODE_FIELD(on_error);
> READ_NODE_FIELD(on_empty)
>
> ??

JsonBehavior now used in JsonExpr as a pointer to node.

> And maybe the code can be better if you don't use JsonPassing struct
> (or use it only inside gram.y) and pass just List *names, List *values.
>
> Nodes should to contains another nodes or scalar types. Using structs
> (that are not nodes)  inside doesn't look consistently.
>
JsonPassing was replaced with two Lists.

> I found some not finished code in 0003 patch
> +
> +json_name_and_value:
> +/* TODO
> +<-><--><-->KEY c_expr VALUE_P json_value_expr %prec POSTFIXOP
> +<-><--><--><-->{ $$ = makeJsonKeyValue($2, $4); }
> +<-><--><-->|
> +*/
>
This is unsupported variant of standard syntax, because it seems to lead
to unresolvable conflicts. The only supports syntax is:

JSON_OBJECT(key : value)
JSON_OBJECT(key VALUE value)

>
> The support for json type in jsonpath also seems to be immature, so I will try
> to remove it in the next iteration.
>
> What do you think? This patch is little bit off topic, so if you don't
> need it, then can be removed. Is there some dependency for "jsontable" ?

There is a dependency in SQL/JSON query functions executor, because executor
uses new structure JsonItem instead of plain JsonbValue. I will try to
preserve refactoring with JsonItem introduction, but remove json support.
If it will be still unacceptable, I will try to completely remove patch #1.

--
Nikita Glukhov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company