Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP)
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTimJBTiwKFaf1OvyunMAFSwzGCyFXOfgu9oU3=YE@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP) (Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@gmail.com> wrote: > * Should we accept a scalar value as a valid JSON? > According to RFC, the root element of JSON text must be an object > or array. But to_json() and from_json() accept scalar values. This seems a bit like the XML document/content distinction, which I've never really understood. If [[1], false] is a legal JSON value, then it seems odd that [1] should be legal but false not. > * JSON to a scalar value by from_json() > How about to have json_to_array(JSON) instead of from_json()? > JSON value is always an array or object, it's nonsense to convert > it to a scalar value directly; to an array seems to match better. > In addition, an array can be indexed with GIN; index-able JSON > type is very attractive. Yeah, I don't like the excessive use of polymorphism either. > * On-disk format of JSON values > (There might be some discussions before... What is the conclusion?) > The current code stores the original input text, but we can use > some kinds of pre-parsed format to store JSON, like hstore. > It can be different from BSON. I see no value to choosing a different on-disk format. It might speed up indexing, but I/O will be slower. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: