Re: jsonb_delete not documented - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: jsonb_delete not documented
Date
Msg-id 31520.1449460155@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: jsonb_delete not documented  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: jsonb_delete not documented  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I see.  The reference from pg_operator to pg_proc is by OID rather than
> function name, so I didn't find them.  Is that because the function is
> overloaded?

Yeah, I suppose so --- regproc can't resolve overloaded function names.

> It's kind of odd that these are the only operators (at
> first glance) that are set up like that.

I think the customary thing when creating functions meant as operator
support is to give them unique names.  These weren't done that way ...
I wasn't involved, but I wonder whether there was uncertainty as to
whether these should be documented as functions or operators.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: jsonb_delete not documented
Next
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: Foreign join pushdown vs EvalPlanQual