Petr Jelinek <pjmo...@pjmodos.net> writes: > Dne 6.4.2010 7:57, Joseph Adams napsal(a): >> To me, the most logical approach is to do the obvious thing: make >> JSON's 'null' be SQL's NULL. For instance, SELECTing on a table with >> NULLs in it and converting the result set to JSON would yield a >> structure with 'null's in it. 'null'::JSON would yield NULL. I'm not >> sure what startling results would come of this approach, but I'm >> guessing this would be most intuitive and useful.
> +1 I think it's a pretty bad idea for 'null'::JSON to yield NULL. AFAIR there is no other standard datatype for which the input converter can yield NULL from a non-null input string, and I'm not even sure that the InputFunctionCall protocol allows it. (In fact a quick look indicates that it doesn't...) To me, what this throws into question is not so much whether JSON null should equate to SQL NULL (it should), but whether it's sane to accept atomic values. If I understood the beginning of this discussion, that's not strictly legal. I think it would be better for strict input mode to reject this, and permissive mode to convert it to a non-atomic value. Thus jsonify('null') wouldn't yield NULL but a structure containing a null. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers