On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:03 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> writes: > > On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 9:18 PM Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Currently description of jsonpath is divided between datatypes section > > and functions and operators section. And yes, this looks cumbersome. > > Agreed, but ... > > > I think we should move the whole description to the one section. > > Probably we should move jsonpath description to datatypes section > > (assuming jsonpath is a datatype) leaving functions and operators > > section with just SQL-level functions and operators. What do you > > think? > > ... I don't think that's an improvement. We don't document detailed > behavior of a datatype's functions in datatype.sgml, and this seems > like it would be contrary to that layout. If anything, I'd merge > the other way, with only a very minimal description of jsonpath > (perhaps none?) in datatype.sgml. > > While we're whining about this, I find it very off-putting that > the jsonpath stuff was inserted in the JSON functions section > ahead of the actual JSON functions. I think it should have > gone after them, because it feels like a barely-related interjection > as it stands. Maybe there's even a case that it should be > its own <sect1>, after the "functions-json" section.
Yes, it think moving jsonpath description to own <sect1> is a good idea. But I still think we should have complete jsonpath description in the single place. What about joining jsonpath description from both datatypes section and functions and operators section into this <sect1>, leaving datatypes section with something very brief? ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
