Re: Extract numeric filed in JSONB more effectively

Hi Tom:

On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 3:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> >> If you use explicit cast, then the code should not be hard, in the
> >> rewrite stage all information should be known.
>
> > Can you point to me where the code is for the XML stuff?
>
> I think Pavel means XMLTABLE, which IMO is an ugly monstrosity of
> syntax --- but count on the SQL committee to do it that way :-(.
>

Thanks for this input!

>
> As far as the current discussion goes, I'm strongly against
> introducing new functions or operators to do the same things that
> we already have perfectly good syntax for. "There's more than one
> way to do it" isn't necessarily a virtue, and for sure it isn't a
> virtue if people have to rewrite their existing queries to make use
> of your optimization.
>

I agree, this is always the best/only reason I'd like to accept.

>
>
> I do like the idea of attaching a Simplify planner support function
> to jsonb_numeric (and any other ones that seem worth optimizing)
>

I have a study planner support function today, that looks great and
I don't think we need much work to do to get our goal, that's amzing.

For all the people who are interested in this topic, I will post a
planner support function soon, you can check that then.

--
Best Regards
Andy Fan