Re: Tackling JsonPath support - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Tackling JsonPath support
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwZWHonT8=8F119f8PaDCkvWAyGu=z-gBDPULCDu_usR6w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Tackling JsonPath support  (Christian Convey <christian.convey@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Tackling JsonPath support  (Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>)
Re: Tackling JsonPath support  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Christian Convey <christian.convey@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
While XPath is expressive and compact, XSLT
is rather verbose; jq is as expressive as XSLT, but with the compact
verbosity of XPath.

Instead, your point was that jq seems to have many advantages over json-path in general, and therefore PG should offer jq instead or, or in addition to, json-path.


IMO jq is considerably closer to XSLT than XPath - which leads me to figure that since xml has both that JSON can benefit from jq and json-path.  I'm not inclined to dig too deep here but I'd rather take jq in the form of "pl/jq" and have json-path (abstractly) as something that you can use like "pg_catalog.get_value(json, json-path)"

​David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: Tackling JsonPath support
Next
From: Nico Williams
Date:
Subject: Re: Tackling JsonPath support