On 18/12/11 04:21, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 7:50 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> wrote:
>> Love having the start here. I forwarded this message to Claes Jakobsson, creator of the jansson-using pg-json
extension.He’s a bit less supportive. He gave me permission to quote him here:
>>
>>> Frankly I see the inclusion of a JSON datatype in core as unnecessary. Stuff should be moved out of core rather
thanin, as we do in Perl. Also, does this patch mean that the 'json' type is forever claimed and can't be replaced by
extensions?
>>>
>>> There's little reason to reimplement JSON parsing, comparision and other routines when there's a multitude of
alreadygood libraries.
>
> That's fair enough, but we've had *many* requests for this
> functionality in core, I don't see what we lose by having at least
> some basic functionality built in.
I think having a JSON data type in core would drastically limit the
exposure third-party JSON extensions would get and that's bad. There are
tons of interesting features a JSON type could have and tying its
development to a one year release cycle might be a disservice both for
people who are willing to provide these features earlier, the users
which are faced with a choice between a fast-moving third-party addon
and a blessed core type and would cause overall confusion.
How about we try the tsearch way and let JSON extensions live outside
core for some time and perhaps if one emerges dominant and would benefit
from inclusion then consider it?
If we keep treating extensions as second-class citizens, they'll never
get the mindshare and importance we seem to want for them (or otherwise
why go through all the trouble to provide an infrastructure for them).
Cheers,
Jan
