Re: jsonb and nested hstore

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Date: 2014-03-05 15:52:08
Message-ID: 20140305155208.GE28321@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 09:19:33AM -0600, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > So, I am going to ask a back-track question and ask why we can't move
> > hstore into core.
>
> This is exactly the opposite of what should be happening. Now, jsonb
> might make it into core because of the json precedent but the entire
> purpose of the extension system is stop dumping everything in the
> public namespace. Stuff 'in core' becomes locked in stone, forever,
> because of backwards compatibility concerns, which are IMNSHO, a
> bigger set of issues than even pg_upgrade related issues. Have we
> gone through all the new hstore functions and made sure they don't
> break existing applications? Putting things in core welds your only
> escape hatch shut.
>
> *All* non-sql standard types ought to be in extensions in an ideal world.

I have seen your opinion on this but there have been enough
counter-arguments that I am not ready to head in that direction.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2014-03-05 15:55:59 Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2014-03-05 15:39:56 Re: jsonb and nested hstore