Re: SQL/JSON: functions

On 14 Mar 2018 17:11, "Alexander Korotkov" <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
wrote:

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 2:10 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> On 2018-03-14 07:54:35 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 04:08:01PM +0300, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> > > The docs are here
> > > https://github.com/obartunov/sqljsondoc/blob/master/README.jsonpath.md
> > >
> > > It's not easy to write docs for SQL/JSON in xml, so I decided to write
> in more
> > > friendly way. We'll have time to convert it to postgres format.
> >
> > If you aim at getting a feature committed first without its
> > documentation, and getting the docs written after the feature freeze
> > using a dedicated open item or such, this is much acceptable in my
> > opinion and the CF is running short in time.
>
> Given that this patch still uses PG_TRY/CATCH around as wide paths of
> code as a whole ExecEvalExpr() invocation,

I agree that we should either use PG_TRY/CATCH over some small and safe
codepaths or surround PG_TRY/CATCH with subtransactions. PG_TRY/CATCH over
ExecEvalExpr() looks really unacceptable.

basically has gotten no
> review, I don't see this going anywhere for v11.
>

I wouldn't be co categorical at this point. Patchset is there for about
year.
Some parts of code received more of review while some parts receives less.
We can surround all dangerous PG_TRY/CATCH pairs with subtransactions,
tolerate performance penalty and leave further optimizations for future
releases.

Agree it's not difficult.

In worst case, we can remove codepaths which use PG_TRY/CATCH and
leave only ERROR ON ERROR behavior of SQL/JSON.

No-no, json user will be really upset on this. Our goal is to be the first
relational database with strong standard compliance.

------
Alexander Korotkov

Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company