On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:53:31AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >I think we also have to break out how much of the feeling that JSONB is
> >not ready is because of problems with the core/contrib split, and how
> >much of it is because of the type itself. I am suggesting that
> >core/contrib split problems are not symptomatic of data type problems,
> >and if address/address the core/contrib split issue, the data type might
> >be just fine.
> >
>
>
> Splitting out jsonb to an extension is going to be moderately
> painful. The json and jsonb functions share some code that's not
> exposed (and probably shouldn't be). It's not likely to be less
> painful than implementing the hstore GIN/GIST ops for jsonb, I
> suspect the reverse.
OK, that's good information. So we have JSONB which ties to a core
type, JSON, _and_ to a contrib module, hstore. No wonder it is so
complex.
I am warming up to the idea of moving hstore internals into core,
sharing that with JSONB, and having contrib/hstore just call the core
functions when defining its data type.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
