On 08/15/2010 11:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com> writes:
>> I'd originally sent this to Joseph Adams, as he has been working on
>> adding a JSON datatype.
>> I've suggested supporting BSON, as there are many client implementations
>> available,
> I knew there would be a lot of critters crawling out as soon as we
> turned over this rock. Which other data-formats-of-the-week shall
> we immortalize as core PG types?
>
>
If BSON is simply in effect an efficient encoding of JSON, then it's not
clear to me that we would want another type at all. Rather, we might
want to consider storing the data in this supposedly more efficient
format, and maybe also some conversion routines.
I agree that we don't want in core a huge array of general serialization
formats. The one thing that JSON has going for it for general use, in my
view, is that, unlike hstore, the structure is not flat. That makes it
potentially useful for various purposes, especially complex structured
function arguments, in places where using hstore can be rather limiting,
and xml overly verbose.
cheers
andrew
