From: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Teodor Sigaev" <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, "Patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | XML binary I/O (was Re: tsearch refactorings) |
Date: | 2007-09-07 11:02:20 |
Message-ID: | 46E12FBC.2080306@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> BTW, the encoding of the XML datatype looks pretty funky. xml_recv first
> reads the xml string with pq_getmsgtext, which applies a client->server
> conversion. Then the xml declaration is parsed, extracting the encoding
> attribute. Then the string is converted again from that encoding (or
> UTF-8 if none was specified) to server encoding. I don't understand how
> it's supposed to work, but ISTM there's one conversion too much,
And it's got an unfortunate typo in it as well: it calls "free(result)"
instead of pfree. I think we need regression tests for the more complex
send/recv functions...
What's the difference between text and binary mode for something like
xml anyway? Could we just call the text format in/out functions and be
done with it?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-09-07 13:00:32 | SET TRANSACTION conformance to SQL:2003 |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-09-07 09:53:16 | Re: tsearch refactorings |