Re: row_to_json bug with index only scans: empty keys!

Yes, it's late beta, but especially if we're pushing json/jsonb usage
as a major feature of this release, I'd say remove surprising cases
now. It's late beta, but that's what beta is for, the last chance for
bug fixes, before we live w/ it for the support life of the release.

The affected class are people with an app that already uses json,
so 9.2 or better, have ran acceptance tests against an early beta of
9.4, and have SQL that returns madeup fieldnames instead of the appropriate
aliases? Which they were probably annoyed at when they wrote the code that
consumes that output in the first place. I think an item in the list of
compatability changes/gotchas should catch anyone who is that on the ball
as to be testing the betas anyway. Anyone pushing that envelope is going to
do the same acceptance testing against the actual release before rolling
to production.

Ross

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:11:25AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Attached are patches meant for HEAD and 9.2-9.4 respectively.
>
> BTW, has anyone got an opinion about whether to stick the full fix into
> 9.4? The argument for, of course, is that we'd get the full fix out to
> the public a year sooner. The argument against is that someone might
> have already done compatibility testing of their application against
> 9.4 betas, and then get blindsided if we change this before release.
>
> I'm inclined to think that since we expect json/jsonb usage to really
> take off with 9.4, it might be better if we get row_to_json behaving
> unsurprisingly now. But I'm not dead set on it.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Ross Reedstrom, Ph.D. reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu
Systems Engineer & Admin, Research Scientist phone: 713-348-6166
Connexions http://cnx.org fax: 713-348-3665
Rice University MS-375, Houston, TX 77005
GPG Key fingerprint = F023 82C8 9B0E 2CC6 0D8E F888 D3AE 810E 88F0 BEDE