Re: JSON for PG 9.2
От | Merlin Moncure |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHyXU0y4WxeT1Y+y-yCgj5scNb7nN_tNFTmurpMLFJKoshV5GA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: JSON for PG 9.2
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: > > > On 12/18/2011 12:17 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> >> One small note about the json type being an extension -- this probably >> means the json type oid won't be fixed -- not a huge deal but it could >> affect some corner cases with binary format consumers. > > Why would that matter more for JSON than for any other non-core type? well, it's a minor headache for all the oid-isn't-in-pgtypes.h types, and only then for high traffic types (which presumably json will be).a while back we coded up a reworked dblink that wasvariadic and could optionally transfer data between database with the binary wire format. any container of a user defined (by oid) type had to be sent strictly as text which is a big performance hit for certain types. recent postgres has an undocumented facility to force type oids to a particular value, but the type definition being inside the create extension script makes this problematic. this is a pretty far out objection though, and I could certainly work around the problem if necessary, but there is some dependency on pg_types.h in the wild. merlin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: