| 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 |