On 11/18/2013 06:13 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 11/15/13, 6:15 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> Thing is, I'm not particularly concerned about *Merlin's* specific use >> case, which there are ways around. What I am concerned about is that we >> may have users who have years of data stored in JSON text fields which >> won't survive an upgrade to binary JSON, because we will stop allowing >> certain things (ordering, duplicate keys) which are currently allowed in >> those columns. At the very least, if we're going to have that kind of >> backwards compatibilty break we'll want to call the new version 10.0. > > We could do something like SQL/XML and specify the level of "validity" > in a typmod, e.g., json(loose), json(strict), etc.
Doesn't work; with XML, the underlying storage format didn't change. With JSONB, it will ... so changing the typemod would require a total rewrite of the table. That's a POLS violation if I ever saw one -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
