On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Terry Laurenzo <tj@laurenzo.org> wrote:
> - It is directly iterable without parsing and/or constructing an AST
> - It is its own representation. If iterating and you want to tear-off a
> value to be returned or used elsewhere, its a simple buffer copy plus some
> bit twiddling.
> - It is conceivable that clients already know how to deal with BSON,
> allowing them to work with the internal form directly (ala MongoDB)
> - It stores a wider range of primitive types than JSON-text. The most
> important are Date and binary.
When last I looked at that, it appeared to me that what BSON could
represent was a subset of what JSON could represent - in particular,
that it had things like a 32-bit limit on integers, or something along
those lines. Sounds like it may be neither a superset nor a subset,
in which case I think it's a poor choice for an internal
representation of JSON.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company