On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Hmm. Well it's quite subjective, but IMO it's already more readable
>> than JSON regardless of whether or not values are quoted, simply
>> because it doesn't have [ ] and { } for lists and maps, which for JSON
>> adds significantly to the number of lines in longer plans.
>
> Yeah. Also, I think it would be fair to not quote values that are known
> constants (for example, Node Type: Seq Scan) and are chosen to not need
> quoting. It's just the things that are variables that worry me.
Passing down information about which things are known constants seems
more complicated to me than just getting the quoting rules right in
the first place. If you look at the patch I proposed, you'll see that
it's really quite simple and only a slight tightening of what I
committed already.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
