| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: ignore null fields in not relation type composite type based constructors |
| Date: | 2014-09-11 15:46:48 |
| Message-ID: | 5411C3E8.504@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/11/2014 08:29 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Pavel Stehule (pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> Can I help with something, it is there some open question?
> I had been hoping for a more definitive answer regarding this option for
> array_to_json, or even a comment about the change to row_to_json.
> Andrew- any thoughts on this? (that's what the ping on IRC is for :).
The change in row_to_json looks OK, I think. we're replacing an
overloading with use of default params, yes? That seems quite
reasonable, and users shouldn't notice the difference.
There might be a case for optionally suppressing nulls in array_to_json,
and it might work reasonably since unlike SQL arrays JSON arrays don't
have to be regular (if nested they are arrays of arrays, not
multi-dimensional single arrays). OTOH I'm not sure if it's worth doing
just for the sake of orthogonality. If someone wants it, then go for it.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-09-11 15:47:26 | Re: Patch to support SEMI and ANTI join removal |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-09-11 15:46:35 | Re: Memory Alignment in Postgres |