SQL JSON compliance
Simon has just pointed out to me that as a result of recent commits, a
number of things now should move from the unsupported table to the
supported table in features.sgml. In particular, it looks to me like all
of these should move:
T811 Basic SQL/JSON constructor functions
T812 SQL/JSON: JSON_OBJECTAGG
T813 SQL/JSON: JSON_ARRAYAGG with ORDER BY
T814 Colon in JSON_OBJECT or JSON_OBJECTAGG
T821 Basic SQL/JSON query operators
T822 SQL/JSON: IS JSON WITH UNIQUE KEYS predicate
T823 SQL/JSON: PASSING clause
T824 JSON_TABLE: specific PLAN clause
T825 SQL/JSON: ON EMPTY and ON ERROR clauses
T826 General value expression in ON ERROR or ON EMPTY clauses
T827 JSON_TABLE: sibling NESTED COLUMNS clauses
T828 JSON_QUERY
T829 JSON_QUERY: array wrapper options
T830 Enforcing unique keys in SQL/JSON constructor functions
T838 JSON_TABLE: PLAN DEFAULT clause
If there's no objection I'll make it so.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
On 13.04.22 22:43, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Simon has just pointed out to me that as a result of recent commits, a
number of things now should move from the unsupported table to the
supported table in features.sgml. In particular, it looks to me like all
of these should move:
This all looks correct to me. Please go ahead.
Show quoted text
T811 Basic SQL/JSON constructor functions
T812 SQL/JSON: JSON_OBJECTAGG
T813 SQL/JSON: JSON_ARRAYAGG with ORDER BY
T814 Colon in JSON_OBJECT or JSON_OBJECTAGG
T821 Basic SQL/JSON query operators
T822 SQL/JSON: IS JSON WITH UNIQUE KEYS predicate
T823 SQL/JSON: PASSING clause
T824 JSON_TABLE: specific PLAN clause
T825 SQL/JSON: ON EMPTY and ON ERROR clauses
T826 General value expression in ON ERROR or ON EMPTY clauses
T827 JSON_TABLE: sibling NESTED COLUMNS clauses
T828 JSON_QUERY
T829 JSON_QUERY: array wrapper options
T830 Enforcing unique keys in SQL/JSON constructor functions
T838 JSON_TABLE: PLAN DEFAULT clause
On 2022-04-29 Fr 04:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 13.04.22 22:43, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Simon has just pointed out to me that as a result of recent commits, a
number of things now should move from the unsupported table to the
supported table in features.sgml. In particular, it looks to me like all
of these should move:This all looks correct to me. Please go ahead.
Thanks, done.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com