> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 at 17:09, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > > I don't agree. If we use a same syntax for some objects types, we should to enforce some consistency.
Just to make it clear, consistency between what?
> I don't think so you should to introduce nulls for JSONs. In this case, the most correct solution is raising a exception.
Now it's my turn to disagree. As an argument I have this thread [1], where similar discussion happened about flexibility of jsonb and throwing an errors (in this particular case whether or not to throw an error when a non existing path was given to jsonb_set).
It doesn't mean so it is designed well.
I can imagine significant number of use cases when adding a value to jsonb like that is desirable outcome, and I'm not sure if I can come up with an example when strictness is the best result. Maybe if you have something in mind, you can describe what would be the case for that? Also as I've mentioned before, consistency between jsonb_set and jsonb subscripting operator will help us to avoid tons of question about why I can do this and this using one option, but not another.
I have only one argument - with this behave nobody knows if value was appended or updated.
