| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Oid registry |
| Date: | 2012-09-25 22:00:11 |
| Message-ID: | 5062296B.4010906@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/25/12 6:13 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> That brings us to another question: should the cast be part of the
> hstore extension, or json? (json is built-in, but imagine for a moment
> that it was an extension, too, so that there was a choice). IIRC someone
> started a discussion on that recently on pgsql-hackers, but I don't
> think there was any conclusion on that.
That just depends how just want to direct the dependency arrows between
these things. Either you make it a third extension, or you put it into
one or the other, for example, if you feel that json support is
"integral" to the hstore functionality.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-09-25 22:01:25 | Re: Oid registry |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-09-25 21:58:47 | Re: Oid registry |