On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: >> > jsonb stores string values as postgres text values, with the unicode >> > escapes >> > resolved, just as it also resolves numbers and booleans into their native >> > representation. If you want the input perfectly preserved, use json, not >> > jsonb. I think that's made pretty clear in the docs. >> > >> > so text->jsonb->text is not and has never been expected to be a noop. >> >> If you can't store text in a jsonb object and get it back out again, >> it doesn't seem like a very useful data type. > > Hrm. That sentence strikes me as slightly confused. > > You *can* store text in a jsonb object and get it back out again, > however, that's not the same as taking a JSON structure which is > represented as text, converting it to jsonb, and then converting it back > into a text representation.
I understand Andrew to be saying that if you take a 6-character string and convert it to a JSON string and then back to text, you will *usually* get back the same 6 characters you started with ... unless the first character was \, the second u, and the remainder hexadecimal digits. Then you'll get back a one-character string or an error instead. It's not hard to imagine that leading to surprising behavior, or even security vulnerabilities in applications that aren't expecting such a translation to happen under them. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
