| From: | Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: jsonb and nested hstore |
| Date: | 2014-02-28 05:35:29 |
| Message-ID: | E99DC525-D05C-4EA7-A4CD-97E7E72EE603@thebuild.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 27, 2014, at 9:28 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> The only problem with that is now you have to move the implementation
> of ||, plus a bunch of other hstore operators into core. That seems
> like a more difficult direction to move in from a practical
> perspective, and I'm not sure that you won't hit a snag elsewhere.
Implementing operators for new types in PostgreSQL is pretty well-trod ground. I really don't know what snags we might hit.
> I suppose that putting it in core would be slightly preferable
> given the strategic importance of jsonb, but it's not something that
> I'd weigh too highly.
I'm completely unsure how to parse the idea that something is strategically important but we shouldn't put it in core. If json was important enough to make it into core, jsonb certainly is.
Honestly, I really don't understand the resistance to putting jsonb in core. There are missing operators, yes; that's a very straight-forward hole to plug.
--
-- Christophe Pettus
xof(at)thebuild(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2014-02-28 05:35:50 | Re: UNION ALL on partitioned tables won't use indices. |
| Previous Message | Christophe Pettus | 2014-02-28 05:28:59 | Re: jsonb and nested hstore |