| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: additional json functionality |
| Date: | 2013-11-16 22:04:23 |
| Message-ID: | 5287EBE7.9000801@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/16/2013 10:30 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2013, at 12:04 PM, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Then perhaps name the "new binary json" as jsob (JavaScript Object Binary)
>> or just jsobj (JavaScript Object) and keep current json for what it is,
>> namely
>> JavaScript Object Notation.
> It’s still input and output as JSON, though.
Yes, because JavaScript Object Notation *is* a serialization format
(aka Notation) for converting JavaScript Objects to text format
and back :)
> I still like JSONB best.
To me it feels redundant, like binarytextbinary
the binary representation of JSON is JavaScript(-like) Object, not
"binary json"
So my vote would be either jsobj or jsdoc (as "document databases") tend
to call the structured types "documents"
Cheers
--
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Klaver | 2013-11-16 22:07:57 | Re: Review:Patch: SSL: prefer server cipher order |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2013-11-16 21:30:48 | Re: additional json functionality |