Re: jsonb and nested hstore

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Date: 2014-02-11 00:24:44
Message-ID: 27485.1392078284@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> right, json could be made work, but any other format change introduced
> to any other already existing type will break. That's not a real
> solution unless we decree henceforth that no formats will change from
> here on in, in which case I withdraw my objection.

Well, I don't recall that we've made a practice of changing binary formats
a lot. Doing so would break existing dumps, which is something we
strenuously avoid.

Even granting that sometime in the future we invent infrastructure to do
the kind of protocol negotiation you're talking about, one byte per JSON
value seems like a cheap and worthwhile cross-check that both ends came
to the same conclusion about what to send.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2014-02-11 00:33:45 Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Previous Message Andres Freund 2014-02-11 00:24:39 Re: jsonb and nested hstore