On 2015-12-03 05:04, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. The problem here is that a significant part of the argument for
> the JSON/JSONB datatypes was that they adhere to standards (RFC 7159
> in particular). I can't see us accepting a patch that changes them
> into JSON-plus-some-PG-enhancements.
Would be nice for my specific need, but probably wouldn't do a lot of
good in the long run.
> (Having said that, it sure looks to me like JSON's idea of a number is
> float/numeric, not merely int. Are you sure you need more capability
> in that department, and if so what exactly?)
Hmm, I think you're right, having just tried some conversions. But
still, I would have to rely on vodka (or similar) knowing this, I guess?
/kaare