Re: WIP json generation enhancements
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP json generation enhancements |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 50B8E563.6000708@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP json generation enhancements (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/27/2012 02:38 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 11/26/2012 12:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Andrew Dunstan >> <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: >>> I don't understand why you would want to create such a cast. If the >>> cast >>> doesn't exist it will do exactly what it does now, i.e. use the type's >>> output function and then json quote and escape it, which in the case of >>> citext is the Right Thing (tm): >>> >>> andrew=# select to_json('foo"bar'::citext); >>> to_json >>> ------------ >>> "foo\"bar" >> I'm not sure either, but setting up a system where seemingly innocuous >> actions can in fact have surprising and not-easily-fixable >> consequences in other parts of the system doesn't seem like good >> design to me. Of course, maybe I'm misunderstanding what will happen; >> I haven't actually tested it myself. >> > > > I'm all for caution, but the argument here seems a bit nebulous. We > could create a sort of auxiliary type, as has been previously > suggested, that would be in all respects the same as the json type > except that it would be the target of the casts that would be used in > to_json() and friends. But, that's a darned ugly thing to have to do, > so I'd want a good concrete reason for doing it. Right now I'm having > a hard time envisioning a problem that could be caused by just using > the straightforward solution that's in my latest patch. > > So, are there any other opinions on this besides mine and Robert's? I'd like to move forward but I want to get this resolved first. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: