On 11/15/19 2:14 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> For release 13+, I have given some more thought to what should be
> done.
> I think the bar for altering the behaviour of a function should be
> rather higher than we have in the present case, and the longer the
> function has been sanctioned by time the higher the bar should be.
> However, I think there is a case to be made for providing a non-strict
> jsonb_set type function. To advance th4e discussion, attached is a POC
> patch that does that. This can also be done as an extension, meaning
> that users of back branches could deploy it immediately. I've tested
> this against release 12, but I think it could go probably all the way
> back to 9.5. The new function is named jsonb_ set_lax, but I'm open to
> bikeshedding.
>
>
> I am sending a review of this patch
>
> 1. this patch does what was proposed and it is based on discussion.
>
> 2. there are not any problem with patching or compilation, all regress
> tests passed.
>
> 4. code looks well and it is well commented.
>
> 5. the patch has enough regress tests
>
> My notes:
>
> a) missing documentation
>
> b) error message is not finalized
>
> + ereport(ERROR,
> + (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
> + errmsg("null jsonb value")));
>
> Any other looks well, and this function can be very handy.
>
>
Thanks for the review. I will add some docco.
What would be a better error message? "null jsonb replacement not
permitted"?
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
