Re: json casts - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: json casts
Date
Msg-id 53851EFA.6010100@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: json casts  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: json casts
List pgsql-hackers
On 05/27/2014 07:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
>> * Andrew Dunstan (andrew@dunslane.net) wrote:
>>> Given that this would be a hard coded behaviour change, is it too
>>> late to do this for 9.4?
>> No, for my 2c.
> If we do it by adding casts then it'd require an initdb, so I'd vote
> against that for 9.4.  If we just change behavior in json.c then that
> objection doesn't apply, so I wouldn't complain.
>
>             


I wasn't proposing to add a cast, just to allow users to add one if they 
wanted. But I'm quite happy to go with special-casing timestamps, and 
leave the larger question for another time.

cheers

andrew



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: json casts
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is pg_lsn marking itself a preferred type?