Tom Lane escribió:
> Andrew Dunstan <and...@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.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to