| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Text format protocol representation | 
| Date: | 2003-05-22 15:38:09 | 
| Message-ID: | 19407.1053617889@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> Oh, I don't. I was just mentioning that if you append a nul in the protocol
> and allow applications to use that instead of the length provided then you've
> pretty much committed to never allowing nuls in text/varchars.
Um.  Well, there isn't any such assumption in the protocol (and I'm agin
Peter's suggestion to put one in), but realistically I don't see us ever
allowing \0 in external-text-representation strings.  It would break too
many things on both client and server sides, and the payback is too small.
The cases I can think of where you'd like to allow \0 are really binary
data, not text, and we now have respectably clean support for binary
I/O.  So the need to allow it seems to me to have dropped way down, too.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-05-22 15:49:31 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/src backend/commands/variable.c b ... | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-22 14:46:09 | Re: $PostgreSQL$ for revision info |