Re: invalidly encoded strings

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> A possible answer is to add a verifymbstr to the string literal
> converter anytime it has processed a numeric backslash-escape in the
> string. Open questions for that are (1) does it have negative effects
> for bytea, and if so is there any hope of working around it? (2) how
> can we postpone the conversion/test to the parse analysis phase?
>

Finding out how to do (2) seems to me the only possible answer to (1).
I'll have a look.

Is that going to cover data coming in via COPY? and parameters for
prepared statements?

>> . for chr() under UTF8, it seems to be generally agreed that the
>> argument should represent the codepoint and the function should return
>> the correspondingly encoded character. If so, possible the argument
>> should be a bigint to accommodate the full range of possible code
>> points. It is not clear what the argument should represent for other
>> multi-byte encodings for any argument higher than 127. Similarly, it is
>> not clear what ascii() should return in such cases. I would be inclined
>> just to error out.
>>
>
> In SQL_ASCII I'd argue for allowing 0..255. In actual MB encodings,
> OK with throwing error.
>
>
>

I was planning on allowing up to 255 for all single byte encodings too.

cheers

andrew