Re: additional json functionality

On 11/15/13, 6:15 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Thing is, I'm not particularly concerned about *Merlin's* specific use
> case, which there are ways around. What I am concerned about is that we
> may have users who have years of data stored in JSON text fields which
> won't survive an upgrade to binary JSON, because we will stop allowing
> certain things (ordering, duplicate keys) which are currently allowed in
> those columns.  At the very least, if we're going to have that kind of
> backwards compatibilty break we'll want to call the new version 10.0.

We could do something like SQL/XML and specify the level of "validity"
in a typmod, e.g., json(loose), json(strict), etc.