Re: additional json functionality

On 11/18/2013 06:13 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/15/13, 6:15 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Thing is, I'm not particularly concerned about *Merlin's* specific use
>> case, which there are ways around. What I am concerned about is that we
>> may have users who have years of data stored in JSON text fields which
>> won't survive an upgrade to binary JSON, because we will stop allowing
>> certain things (ordering, duplicate keys) which are currently allowed in
>> those columns. At the very least, if we're going to have that kind of
>> backwards compatibilty break we'll want to call the new version 10.0.
>
> We could do something like SQL/XML and specify the level of "validity"
> in a typmod, e.g., json(loose), json(strict), etc.

Doesn't work; with XML, the underlying storage format didn't change.
With JSONB, it will ... so changing the typemod would require a total
rewrite of the table. That's a POLS violation if I ever saw one

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com