On 08/20/2015 12:24 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > On 8/17/15 4:25 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> On 08/17/2015 02:18 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >>> >On 8/17/15 3:33 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >>>> >>Again, how do we handle missing keys? Just return NULL? or >>>> ERROR? I'd >>>> >>prefer the former, but there will be arguments the other way. >>> > >>> >I've been wondering if we should add some kind of "strict" JSON. My big >>> >concern is throwing an error if you try to provide duplicate keys, but >>> >it seems reasonable that json_strict would throw an error if you try to >>> >reference something that doesn't exist. >> Only if there's demand for it. Is there? > > I'm certainly worried (paranoid?) about it. Postgres is very good about > not silently dropping data and this seems a glaring departure from that. > I haven't looked yet but I'm hoping this could at least be added as an > extension without duplicating a bunch of the existing JSON stuff.
There's a big difference between silently dropping data and implicitly creating it. As I said, the only reason I could see wanting a strict mode is because AppDev users expect it to be consistent with their programming languages. Otherwise, from a user perspective, being able to create a whole nested chain in one statement is a big win. What could be added as an extension? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers