| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: additional json functionality |
| Date: | 2013-11-19 20:32:55 |
| Message-ID: | 528BCAF7.4020103@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/19/2013 03:06 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> Therefore I am interested only in supporting two:
>>
>> a) the legacy behavior from 9.2 and 9.3 so we don't destroy people's
> I'm uncomfortable with the word 'legacy'. This suggests the new type
> will essentially deprecate the old type.
"Existing" might be a better word.
> jsonb will be likely be
> pessimal to large serializations. If you're not manipulating and
> searching the documents, why would you use it? It's going to take
> more space on disk and memory and should provide little benefit for
> present *as well as future code* . (note, it will provide extreme
> benefits for nosql type uses which is of huge strategic importance for
> the project). json and jsonb APIs should work together cleanly, and
> the documentation should suggest which types are different and better
> for which cases.
I agree with most of this.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Browne | 2013-11-19 20:35:51 | Re: Extra functionality to createuser |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-19 20:32:41 | Re: Turning recovery.conf into GUCs |