From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |
Date: | 2012-01-31 17:58:08 |
Message-ID: | 4F282BB0.4060309@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/30/2012 10:37 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>> Aside: is query_to_json really necessary? It seems rather ugly and
>> easily avoidable using row_to_json.
>>
>
> I started with this, again by analogy with query_to_xml(). But I agree
> it's a bit ugly. If we're not going to do it, then we definitely need
> to look at caching the output funcs in the function info. A closer
> approximation is actually:
>
> SELECT array_to_json(array_agg(q))
> FROM ( your query here ) q;
>
>
> But then I'd want the ability to break that up a bit with line feeds,
> so we'd need to adjust the interface slightly. (Hint: don't try the
> above with "select * from pg_class".)
>
>
> I'll wait on further comments, but I can probably turn these changes
> around very quickly once we're agreed.
>
>
>
based on Abhijit's feeling and some discussion offline, the consensus
seems to be to remove query_to_json.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-01-31 17:58:20 | Proposal for a new severity level |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-01-31 17:35:58 | Re: Index-only scan performance regression |