| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_hba_file_settings view patch |
| Date: | 2016-10-25 07:23:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20161025072329.px2eluan7mtshvv5@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Haribabu Kommi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> Yes, I agree that adding these JSONB utility functions for this view
> is an overkill, but I thought that these are may be useful for some
> users if it is a JSONB type instead of array.
Peter Eisentraut said he'd like JSON better:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5547DB0A.2020904@gmx.net
I asked twice about the use of JSON, suggesting an array instead:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20151204163147.GZ2763@alvherre.pgsql
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160201215714.GA98800@alvherre.pgsql
I now think that we should figure out what it is that we want before we
continue to request it to be changed over and over.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2016-10-25 07:48:35 | Re: [RFC] Transaction management overhaul is necessary? |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-10-25 06:58:16 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |