On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> On 10/26/2016 12:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I concur.  JSON isn't a core datatype and I don't want to see it treated
>>> as one.  We should redesign this view so that it doesn't rely on anything
>>> more advanced than arrays.
>> Huh?  Sure it is.   Ships in PostgreSQL-core.
> To my way of thinking it's a nonstandard extension.  The fact that we
> chose to package it in core and not as an extension doesn't alter the
> fact that it's peripheral to the system and nothing else depends on it.
> I'd like to keep things that way.  I wouldn't want any core-system
> functionality to start depending on the geometric types, either.

I got a similar opinion regarding this patch to be honest after
looking at it, seeing actually with a bad eye the use of fancy data
types that are not well-spread among the other catalog views and
functions. So -1 for JSON and +1 for arrays.

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

Reply via email to