On 11/17/2013 10:51 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > "David E. Wheeler" <da...@justatheory.com> writes: >> You know that both types support scalar values right? 'a'::JSON works now, >> and 'a'::hstore works with the WIP patch. For that reason I would not think >> that "doc" or "obj" would be good choices. > I'm wondering about just pushing hstore in core (even if technically > still an extension, install it by default, like we do for PLpgSQL), and > calling it a day. > > If you need pre-9.4 JSON-is-text compatibility, use the json datatype, > if you want something with general index support, use hstore. +1 for getting also hstore in
I think hstore needs to keep its text format compatible with older hstore (in this discussion lets call this text format "hson", short for HStore Object Notation for added confusion :) > > For bikeshedding purposes, what about calling it jstore, +1 for jstore as well. I am happy with jstore, jsdoc, jsobj jstore/jsobj/jsdoc really is *not* JSON, but a bona-fide freeform structured datatype that happens to have JSON as convenient I/O format. You may want to use jstore even if you have never needed JSON as serialisation/transport format before. I do not like jsonB (sounds too much like json2, i.e. like we were trying to cover up a design accident) nor json_strict (as this is not really strict as it indeed does accept scalars, not just Arrays/Lists and Objects/Dictionaries as per JSON standard) > as in “we actually know how to store your json documents”? > > Regards, Cheers -- Hannu Krosing PostgreSQL Consultant Performance, Scalability and High Availability 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
