On 11/13/2013 07:01 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>
> I guess we should not replace current JSON type with hstore based
> one, but add something json-like based on nested hstore instead.
Well, that's two voices for that course of action.
Interesting that I don't think I heard a single voice for this either at
pgCon or pgOpen, although I spent large amounts of time at both talking
to people about Json, so I'd be interested to hear more voices.
It would actually simplify things in a way if we do that - we've been
working on a way of doing this that wouldn't upset pg_upgrade. This
would render that effort unnecessary.
However it will complicate things for users who will have to choose
between the data types, and function authors who will possibly have to
write versions of functions to work with both types.
>
> Also most of the current json functions should also be moved to work on
> jsobj instead with explicit cast from json to jsobj
>
Sure, we can overload them - that's probably the least of our worries.
cheers
andrew