Tom Lane escribió:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> [ I can already hear somebody insisting on a yaml type :-( ]
>
> > Now that's a case where I think a couple of converter functions at most
> > should meet the need.
>
> Well, actually, now that you mention it: how much of a json type would
> be duplicative of the xml stuff? Would it be sufficient to provide
> json <-> xml converters and let the latter type do all the heavy lifting?
> (If so, this patch ought to be hstore_to_xml instead.)
But then there's the matter of overhead: how much would be wasted by
transforming to XML, and then parsing the XML back to transform to JSON?
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.