|From:||Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>|
|To:||Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, e(dot)indrupskaya(at)postgrespro(dot)ru|
|Subject:||Re: SQL/JSON revisited|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 2023-03-15 We 08:49, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 10:08 PM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 08.03.23 22:40, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> These both seem like things not worth holding up progress for, and I
>>> think it would be good to get these patches committed as soon as
>>> possible. My intention is to commit them (after some grammar
>>> adjustments) plus their documentation in the next few days.
>> If possible, the documentation for each incremental part should be part
>> of that patch, not a separate all-in-one patch.
> Here's a version that includes documentation of the individual bits in
> their own commits. I've also merged the patch to add the PLAN clause
> to JSON_TABLE into the patch that adds JSON_TABLE itself.
Hi, I have taken these and done some surgery to reduce the explosion on
grammar symbols. The attached set is just Amit's patches with some of
this surgery done - nothing other than gram.y has been touched. Patches
2 and 5 in the series could be sanely squashed onto patches 1 and 4
respectively. I haven't done anything significant yet with the JSONTABLE
patch, there is probably some more low hanging fruit there, and possibly
some still in the earlier patches.
|Next Message||Peter Geoghegan||2023-03-17 01:22:42||Re: Amcheck verification of GiST and GIN|
|Previous Message||Peter Smith||2023-03-17 01:12:15||Re: Allow logical replication to copy tables in binary format|