From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: additional json functionality |
Date: | 2013-11-17 20:02:59 |
Message-ID: | 864FBC31-2D5A-4E08-8E4B-48C986C3CCE6@justatheory.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Nov 16, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> 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"
You know that both types support scalar values right? 'a'::JSON works now, and 'a'::hstore works with the WIP patch. For that reason I would not think that "doc" or "obj" would be good choices.
I like JSONB because:
1. The "B" means "binary"
2. The "B" means "second"
3. It's short
4. See also BYTEA.
Best,
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2013-11-17 20:05:28 | Re: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS AS |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2013-11-17 19:04:57 | Re: pre-commit triggers |