| From: | Christian Convey <christian(dot)convey(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Tackling JsonPath support |
| Date: | 2016-11-29 16:16:29 |
| Message-ID: | CAPfS4ZxGfNAf-hUTGp-cNZ1_E0qyYtPr77EVwpOh8=g=y1efLw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
>
> 2016-11-29 7:34 GMT+01:00 Christian Convey <christian(dot)convey(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:28 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> We now support XPath function - JSONPath is similar to XPath -
>>>
>>> it is better for user, because have to learn only one language.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that we use XPath, not JSONPath, as our language for
>> json-path expressions?
>>
>
> surely not.
>
> follow ANSI/SQL :)
>
I see. Then I'm afraid I still don't understand what you're main point was
when you wrote:
> We now support XPath function - JSONPath is similar to XPath -
>
> it is better for user, because have to learn only one language.
>
- C
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jelinek | 2016-11-29 16:18:17 | Re: Tackling JsonPath support |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-11-29 16:12:25 | Re: Exclude pg_largeobject form pg_dump |