| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, Ryan Pedela <rpedela(at)datalanche(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Ilya Ashchepkov <koctep(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: jsonb concatenate operator's semantics seem questionable |
| Date: | 2015-05-20 19:42:26 |
| Message-ID: | 20150520194226.GM27868@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-05-20 15:37:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > That does cover all bases, and users would be able to create the
> > operator which suits their particular use case easily. It's also fairly
> > similar to how jsquery works, although the syntax is completely different.
>
> > But ... it's after feature freeze. So, thoughts?
>
> I think this could be seen as a correction/bug fix for a pre-freeze
> feature. We should not be too resistant to filing down rough edges
> on new features, even if that involves a spec change.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2015-05-20 19:42:39 | Re: jsonb concatenate operator's semantics seem questionable |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-05-20 19:42:23 | Re: Disabling trust/ident authentication configure option |