Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser
Date: 2024-04-24 08:56:54
Message-ID: ZijJVjQDape4FBlh@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 02:04:40PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah, I think this patch invented a new solution to a problem that
> we've solved in a different way everywhere else. I think we should
> change it to match what we do in general.

As of ba3e6e2bca97, did you notice that test_json_parser_perf
generates two core files because progname is not set, failing an
assertion when using the frontend logging?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2024-04-24 09:02:14 Re: Use XLOG_CONTROL_FILE macro everywhere?
Previous Message Bertrand Drouvot 2024-04-24 08:38:01 Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3