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?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
