On 11.09.24 13:25, Amit Langote wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 6:57 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
>> On 11.09.24 09:51, Amit Langote wrote:
>>>>> I've updated your patch to include updated test outputs and a nearby
>>>>> code comment expanded. Do you intend to commit it or do you prefer
>>>>> that I do?
>>>>
>>>> This change looks unrelated:
>>>>
>>>> -ERROR: new row for relation "test_jsonb_constraints" violates check
>>>> constraint "test_jsonb_constraint4"
>>>> +ERROR: new row for relation "test_jsonb_constraints" violates check
>>>> constraint "test_jsonb_constraint5"
>>>>
>>>> Is this some randomness in the way these constraints are evaluated?
>>>
>>> The result of JSON_QUERY() in the CHECK constraint changes, so the
>>> constraint that previously failed now succeeds after this change,
>>> because the comparison looked like this before and after:
>>>
>>> -- before
>>> postgres=# select jsonb '[10]' < jsonb '[10]';
>>> ?column?
>>> ----------
>>> f
>>> (1 row)
>>>
>>> -- after
>>> postgres=# select jsonb '10' < jsonb '[10]';
>>> ?column?
>>> ----------
>>> t
>>> (1 row)
>>>
>>> That causes the next constraint to be evaluated and its failure
>>> reported instead.
>>>
>>> In the attached, I've adjusted the constraint for the test case to be
>>> a bit more relevant and removed a nearby somewhat redundant test,
>>> mainly because its output changes after the adjustment.
>>
>> Ok, that looks good. Good that we could clear that up a bit.
>
> Thanks for checking. Would you like me to commit it?
Please do.
