From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Typed hstore proposal |
Date: | 2011-12-22 16:26:18 |
Message-ID: | 4EF35A2A.8000304@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/22/2011 10:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson"<johann(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> I mean to create a typed hstore, called tstore for now.
> Um ... what is the point of this, exactly? From what I've seen, most
> applications for hstore are pretty happy with the fact that hstore is
> only weakly typed, and if an entry *is* an integer, or a float, or
> whatever else, it's not hard to cast to and from text as needed.
> So this idea looks like a solution in search of a problem, which is
> going to need a whole lot more work before it even gets to the point of
> being as useful as hstore. It's not for instance apparent what is the
> use of iterating over only entries that were supplied as integers ---
> there is no reason to think that they're related just because of that.
>
>
Yeah, the thing that's annoying in some cases about hstore is not that
it's untyped but that it's flat.
That's what a JSON type would buy us, a lightweight tree structured
type, and moreover one that is widely and increasingly used and well
understood.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-22 16:34:31 | Re: Wishlist: parameterizable types |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-22 16:20:13 | Re: CLOG contention |