On 17.09.2020 08:41, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 09:24:11AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I think patches 5 and 6 need to be submitted to the next commitfest,
This is far too much scope creep to be snuck in under the current CF item.
I'll look at patches 1-4.
Even with that, the patch set has been waiting on author for the last
six weeks, so I am marking it as RwF for now. Please feel free to
resubmit.
Attached 51st version of the patches rebased onto current master.
There were some shift/reduce conflicts in SQL grammar that have appeared
after "expr AS keyword" refactoring in 06a7c3154f. I'm not sure if I resolved
them correctly. JSON TEXT pseudotype, introduced in #0006, caused a lot of
grammar conflicts, so it was replaced with simple explicit pg_catalog.json.
Also new CoercionForm COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX was introduced, and this reminds custom
function formats that I have used in earlier version of the patches for
deparsing of SQL/JSON constructor expressions that were based on raw json[b]
function calls. These custom function formats were replaced in v43 with
dedicated executor nodes for SQL/JSON constructors. So, I'm not sure is it
worth to try to replace back nodes with new COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX.
--
Nikita Glukhov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
