Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Joseph Adams > <joeyadams3.14...@gmail.com> wrote: >> * No surprises when casting between JSON and TEXT. If approach B is >> used, '"string"'::json would be '"string"', but '"string"'::json::text >> would be 'string'.
> As far as I'm concerned, that's a non-starter. It should be legal to > cast text to json, but what it should do is validate that the string > is already legal JSON, not quote it as a string. I'm not really convinced about that. It seems clear to me that there are two behaviors that we'd like: 1. Take a string that is legal JSON, and make it into a JSON object. 2. Take an arbitrary string (or a number, a bool, etc) and make it a literal value within a JSON object. We can make one of these behaviors be invoked by a cast, and the other by an explicit function call --- the question is which is which. I'm inclined to think that associating #2 with casts might be better, because clearly casting numerics or bools to JSON ought to act like #2. If we do it as you suggest then casting text to JSON behaves differently from casting anything else to JSON. 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