Re: proposal: ignore null fields in not relation type composite type based constructors

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: proposal: ignore null fields in not relation type composite type based constructors
Date: 2014-09-08 07:02:57
Message-ID: CAFj8pRDd8BTAJ+nMoNwBAoxsr5aFa8yUAzEkWxo3OWjQnyKmtA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2014-09-08 6:27 GMT+02:00 Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>:

> * Pavel Stehule (pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> > ignore_nulls in array_to_json_pretty probably is not necessary. On second
> > hand, the cost is zero, and we can have it for API consistency.
>
> I'm willing to be persuaded either way on this, really. I do think it
> would be nice for both array_to_json and row_to_json to be single
> functions which take default values, but as for if array_to_json has a
> ignore_nulls option, I'm on the fence and would defer to people who use
> that function regularly (I don't today).
>
> Beyond that, I'm pretty happy moving forward with this patch.
>

ok

Regards

Pavel

>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-09-08 07:13:44 Re: gist vacuum gist access
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2014-09-08 06:05:54 Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches)