st 7. 11. 2018 v 19:35 odesÃlatel Dmitry Dolgov <9erthali...@gmail.com> napsal:
> > On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 at 17:09, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@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. > > [1]: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZT3uZ7aFktx-nNEWGbapN1oy2t2gt10pnOzygZys_Ak1Q%40mail.gmail.com >
