Re: [HACKERS] jsonb problematic operators - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Geoff Winkless
Subject Re: [HACKERS] jsonb problematic operators
Date
Msg-id CAEzk6fc9uCYu4pB0E9TLb_Lsdd=WBTkkRQ66TMr9_-naFkgb6g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [HACKERS] jsonb problematic operators  (Jordan Gigov <coladict@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 9 December 2016 at 11:50, Jordan Gigov <coladict@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is this problem with the jsonb operators "? text" "?| text[]"
> and "?& text[]" that the question mark is typically used for prepared
> statement parameters in the most used abstraction APIs in Java and
> PHP.
>
> This really needs an alternative. Something like "HAS text", "HAS
> ANY(text[])" and "HAS ALL(text[])" same as regular array usage. It
> probably should be another word that has less chance of becoming a
> conflict with another operator in future SQL specifications, but
> that's for you to decide.

You mean something like the jsonb_ functions ?

\df jsonb*

> It's not a good idea to expect everyone else to make for workarounds
> for problems you choose to create.

I'd say it's not a good idea to come asking questions of a mailing
list with an attitude like that, but hey, it's nearly Holidays.

Geoff



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] `array_position...()` causes SIGSEGV
Next
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Declarative partitioning - another take