Re: jsonb and nested hstore

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Date: 2014-03-05 17:29:49
Message-ID: 20140305172949.GA15259@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:26:13PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> It's not clear how much different it would be if we waited til 9.5
> >> either- do we anticipate a lot of code changes beyond the copy/paste for
> >> these?
> >
> > What _would_ be interesting is to move all the hstore code into core,
> > and have hstore contrib just call the hstore core parts. That way, you
> > have one copy of the code, it is shared with JSONB, but hstore remains
> > as an extension that you can change or remove later.
>
> That seems like an approach possibly worth investigating. It's not
> too different from what we did when we moved text search into core.
> The basic idea seems to be that we want jsonb in core, and we expect
> it to replace hstore, but we can't get just get rid of hstore because
> it has too many users.

Yes. It eliminates the problem of code duplication, but keeps hstore in
contrib for flexibility and compatibility.

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

+ Everyone has their own god. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2014-03-05 17:30:27 Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Previous Message Dean Rasheed 2014-03-05 17:27:51 Re: [PATCH] Negative Transition Aggregate Functions (WIP)