On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Well, if we have to break backwards compatibility when we try to do > binary storage, we're not going to be happy either. So I think we'd > better have a plan in mind for what will happen then.
Who says we're ever going to do any such thing? This was extensively debated when we added the original type, and I thought that it was agreed that we might ultimately need both a type that stored JSON as text and another that stored it as binary. And we might need an XML-binary type as well. But there are also cases where storing the data as text is *better*, and I don't see us ever getting rid of that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
