On 11/18/2013 05:19 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 11/17/2013 08:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> Now, if it turns out that the new hstore is not dealing with json input >>> and output, we could have json, jstore and hstore. >> Jstore isn't the worst name suggestion I've heard on this thread. The >> reason I prefer JSONB though, is that a new user looking for a place to >> put JSON data will clearly realize that JSON and JSONB are alternatives >> and related in some way. They won't necessarily expect that "jstore" >> has anything to do with JSON, especially when there is another type >> called "JSON". Quite a few people are liable to think it's something to >> do with Java. >> >> Besides, we might get sued by these people: http://www.jstor.org/ ;-) >> > > I don't think any name that doesn't begin with "json" is acceptable. > I could live with "jsonb". It has the merit of brevity, but maybe it's > a tad > too close to "json" to be the right answer. How about jsondoc, or jsonobj ?
It is still reasonably 'json' but not too easy to confuse with existing json when typing And it perhaps hints better at the main difference from string-json, namely that it is an object and not textual source code / notation / processing info . 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