From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: jsonpath versus NaN
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 18:20:57 -0400
Message-ID: <1736148.1594246857@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPpHfdtqJtiSXkP7tOXez18NxhLUH_-75bL8=Oce4Ki+bv7V6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <203949.1591879542@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAPpHfdtLr1MkBr0Sgzu+HO0fkEP3W11SmLtOoBwWox8MiQdpmA@mail.gmail.com>
<355114.1591902003@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAPpHfdtizzX++0DUVL0_CCJjp6Rd-NT9rmqe0PvL7-t62Eq0oA@mail.gmail.com>
<1446772.1592407984@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAF4Au4yPfxBO7HOryzoNpm_6y8c0gFHN=G_7wj6v5226HrKrKA@mail.gmail.com>
<1552001.1592496464@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAPpHfdvU4KNrbusUXr_hwv8Jd_GkJx0mzSY0TTAGPsexPxSn+Q@mail.gmail.com>
<1553461.1592498746@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAPpHfdtP6Y2dH6_WG-1xEj+GHJ6mdbWA3O+y5tFEBunQdA_SPw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPpHfdtqJtiSXkP7tOXez18NxhLUH_-75bL8=Oce4Ki+bv7V6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> writes:
> The patchset is attached, sorry for the delay.
> The first patch improves error messages, which appears to be unclear
> for me. If one applies .double() method to a numeric value, we
> restrict that this numeric value should fit to double precision type.
> If it doesn't fit, the current error message just says the following.
> ERROR: jsonpath item method .double() can only be applied to a numeric value
> But that's confusing, because .double() method is naturally applied to
> a numeric value. Patch makes this message explicitly report that
> numeric value is out of range for double type. This patch also adds
> test exercising this error. When string can't be converted to double
> precision, I think it's better to explicitly say that we expected
> valid string representation of double precision type.
I see your point here, but the English of the replacement error messages
could be improved. I suggest respectively
numeric argument of jsonpath item method .%s() is out of range for type double precision
string argument of jsonpath item method .%s() is not a valid representation of a double precision number
As for 0002, I'd rather see the convertJsonbScalar() code changed back
to the way it was, ie just
case jbvNumeric:
numlen = VARSIZE_ANY(scalarVal->val.numeric);
padlen = padBufferToInt(buffer);
...
There is no argument for having an its-not-NaN assertion here when
there aren't similar assertions throughout the jsonb code.
Also, it seems like it'd be smart to reject isinf() and isnan() results
from float8in_internal_opt_error in both executeItemOptUnwrapTarget code
paths, ie numeric source as well as string source. Yeah, we don't expect
to see those cases in a jbvNumeric (so I wouldn't change the error message
text), but it's cheap insurance.
No other comments.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, aekorotkov@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: jsonpath versus NaN
In-Reply-To: <1736148.1594246857@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox