From: Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213@163.com>
To: Haibo Yan <tristan.yim@gmail.com>
Cc: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>,  David Rowley
 <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>,  Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,  Amit
 Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>,  Alvaro Herrera
 <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,  jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
  Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>,
  pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Extract numeric filed in JSONB more effectively
In-Reply-To: <7487A577-7BDC-4B94-9FFA-741E95439BFC@gmail.com> (Haibo Yan's
	message of "Thu, 2 Apr 2026 21:46:22 -0700")
References: <87r0hmvuvr.fsf@163.com>
	<8102ff5b-b156-409e-a48f-e53e63a39b36@eisentraut.org>
	<8734t6c5rh.fsf@163.com> <87o7bn7z56.fsf@163.com>
	<875xx197bp.fsf@163.com> <87ttk0lgcx.fsf@163.com>
	<CAApHDvqnUONCN54dAXdH678ELK7aH2gyVhh0GjTRtrexPd9YMw@mail.gmail.com>
	<8734m5fua1.fsf@163.com>
	<mmilfltxeqgajpi4zok2v2moudot6bhdmwsqgjgnymz3nvkvng@k3caignaldcp>
	<87a5dx4cfb.fsf@163.com>
	<cudr6wao4hz2otlycx2z2equkigbjxslxvzqb3ejfc4amroheo@frqbvffcgqnu>
	<7487A577-7BDC-4B94-9FFA-741E95439BFC@gmail.com>
User-Agent: mu4e 1.14.0-pre2; emacs 30.2
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 14:13:35 +0800
Message-ID: <873417fgc0.fsf@163.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/873417fgc0.fsf%40163.com>
Precedence: bulk


Hi Haibo,

> I=E2=80=99d like to continue pushing this patch forward.
> Based on the earlier discussion, I reworked the patch into a smaller
> stage-1 version with a narrower scope and a simpler rewrite
> strategy. ..
> and does not yet try to cover array/path extraction or integer/float
> typed extractors.

Thanks for working on this. I did a quick comparison between this
version and my last patch v18 [1],  here is the difference.

My previous v18[1]: 542 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
Your patch: 543 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

However as what you have realized, your current patch still lack of many=20
optimizations, Not only the integer/float stuff, but also many
functions, e.g. jsonb_array_element, jsonb_extract_path,
jsonb_path_query and jsonb_path_query_first. After considering this,
what patch will look like in your approach? I guess you can see many
duplications. Less code doesn't always mean better, but I think this
still be a key consideration to address/check.=20=20


> I also ran a small microbenchmark to isolate the cast-over-object-field p=
ath. On my setup, the current patch shows the following gains:
> Query                                        Before      After       Spee=
dup
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
> SELECT sum((j->'n')::numeric) FROM t         118.028 ms  56.082 ms   2.10x
> SELECT count(*) FROM t WHERE (j->'b')::bool  115.665 ms  51.945 ms   2.23x
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------

Thanks for running the test.=20

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/87ttk0lgcx.fsf%40163.com

--=20
Best Regards
Andy Fan