Horton

Re: JSON for PG 9.2

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Joey Adams <joeyadams3.14159@gmail.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Claes Jakobsson <claes@gluefinance.com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Jan Wieck <janwieck@yahoo.com>
Date: 2011-12-18T03:46:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 10:42 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, I think that that's exactly the question here: if we do something
>> in core, will it foreclose options for people who want to do add-ons?
>
> Why would it? They would just have to use a different name.

Yeah, exactly.  Or for that matter, the same name in a different
schema.  And as for the question of text vs. binary, that's going to
be two separate data types whether it gets done in core or elsewhere.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company