Re: jsonb and nested hstore

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: jsonb and nested hstore
Date: 2014-02-28 18:43:13
Message-ID: CAM3SWZTer_1LstyZ2Exw1+2nbMMMUnFxuV8qtj3uZnn6uFmn8g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:01 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> But anyway, I think we've seen enough of these to conclude that the casts
> from hstore to jsonb and back should not be implicit. I am fairly confident
> that changing that would fix your complaint and the similar one that Peter
> Geoghegan had.

Yes, it will, but I think that that will create more problems than it
will solve (which is not to suggest that an implicit cast is the right
thing). That will require that any non-trivial usage of jsonb requires
copious casting, where nested hstore does not. The hstore module
hardly contains some nice extras that a minority of jsonb users will
be interested in. It contains among other basic things, operator
classes required to index jsonb. All of my examples will still not
work, plus a bunch of cases that currently do work reasonably well.
There'll just be a different error message.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2014-02-28 18:44:09 Re: proposal: new long psql parameter --on-error-stop
Previous Message Ali Piroozi 2014-02-28 18:33:14 Re: Equivalence Rules