From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | xtracoder(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #13936: jsonb_object() -> ERROR: unknown type of jsonb container |
Date: | 2016-02-09 14:37:41 |
Message-ID: | 56B9F9B5.9060409@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On 02/09/2016 06:57 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:52 AM, <xtracoder(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Here is the simple code to reproduce:
>>>
>>> select jsonb_object('{}'::text[], '{}'::text[])
>>>
>>> Result of execution is
>>>
>>> ERROR: unknown type of jsonb container
>>> ********** Error **********
>>>
>>> ERROR: unknown type of jsonb container
>>> SQL state: XX000
>>>
>>> Expected result - jsonb object with no attributes, i.e.: '{}'
>> I agree that this is a bug.
>>
>> Looks like it's coming from the jsonb output function, which is an
>> additional concern:
> Yep, this comes from a copy-paste error in jsonb_object_two_arg from
> json_object_two_arg, caused by this bit particularly:
> if (nkdims == 0)
> PG_RETURN_DATUM(CStringGetTextDatum("{}"));
> json is represented as an equivalent of a text data type, but that's
> not the case of jsonb. So while this will work for json, that's really
> broken for jsonb.
Oh. Feeling a bit sheepish right now.
>
> One way to address this issue is to call jsonb_from_cstring() when
> nkdims == 0. Another method, a bit more complex, is to build an empty
> object and then return it as a result, like more or less that for
> example:
> pushJsonbValue(&result.parseState, WJB_BEGIN_OBJECT, NULL);
> result = pushJsonbValue(&result.parseState, WJB_END_OBJECT, NULL);
> return result;
>
> The patch attached uses jsonb_from_cstring(), with new regression
> tests, and it fixes the issue for me. That seems more simple, but the
> other method would work as well, though I am not sure this is worth
> the complication.
Yeah, I don't think we need to optimize this case too much.
I'll get it done.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | kurt | 2016-02-09 14:42:01 | BUG #13938: CAST error on Index "function must be immutable" |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-02-09 13:42:53 | Re: Re: BUG #13685: Archiving while idle every archive_timeout with wal_level hot_standby |