On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 2:40:49PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> Should we see about making a more flexible serialization
> infrastructure? What we have is mostly /ad hoc/, and has already
> caused real pain to the PostGIS folks, this even after some pretty
> significant and successful efforts were made in this direction.
Hi all. Is anybody working on this right now? I would like to pick
this task for the summer. First of all, what do you think about what
David said? Should we try and design a generic infrastructure for
similar serialization datatypes? If so, will we need to refactor some
pieces from the JSON/XML implementation? I looked over the code and it
seems nicely decoupled, but I am not sure what this would involve.
I've done this before for MySQL (not yet completed), but I'd love
to try it for PostgreSQL too.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:23:11AM -0700, José Luis Tallón wrote:
> Have you investigated JSONB vs ProtoBuf space usage ?
> (the key being the "B" -- Postgres' own binary JSON
This is something I can further investigate, but another (possibly
major) benefit of the Protocol Buffers over JSON is that they *still*
have a schema. I think they combine advantages from both structured
and schemaless data.
My best guess is that we shouldn't focus on abstracting *any*
serialization paradigm, but only the ones that have a schema (like
Thrift or Protocol Buffers). Speaking of schemas, where is the best
place to keep that? For MySQL I opted for a plain text file similar to
.trg files (the ones used by MySQL for keeping triggers).
I'd love to talk more about this.
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: