Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> writes:
> On 19/02/16 10:10, Ãlvaro HernÃ¡ndez Tortosa wrote:
>> Oleg and I discussed recently that a really good addition to a GSoC
>> item would be to study whether it's convenient to have a binary
>> serialization format for jsonb over the wire.
> Seems a bit risky for a GSoC project. We don't know if a different
> serialization format will be a win, or whether we want to do it in the
> end, until the benchmarking is done. It's also not clear what we're
> trying to achieve with the serialization format: smaller on-the-wire
> size, faster serialization in the server, faster parsing in the client,
> or what?
Another variable is that your answers might depend on what format you
assume the client is trying to convert from/to. (It's presumably not
text JSON, but then what is it?)
Having said that, I'm not sure that risk is a blocking factor here.
History says that a large fraction of our GSoC projects don't result
in a commit to core PG. As long as we're clear that "success" in this
project isn't measured by getting a feature committed, it doesn't seem
riskier than any other one. Maybe it's even less risky, because there's
less of the success condition that's not under the GSoC student's control.
regards, tom lane
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: