Re: BUG #8469: Xpath behaviour unintuitive / arguably wrong

From: Вилен Тамбовцев <v(dot)tambovtsev(at)outlook(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #8469: Xpath behaviour unintuitive / arguably wrong
Date: 2015-02-03 22:13:03
Message-ID: DUB125-W620D34D40D70CD216DCAD9933D0@phx.gbl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Actually, xpath()'s output is not original XML, at least there must be a function like XML_UNESCAPE() for current behavior
otherwise there is no way to get proper xml with xpath

--
Вилен Тамбовцев

----------------------------------------
> From: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> To: v(dot)tambovtsev(at)outlook(dot)com
> CC: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #8469: Xpath behaviour unintuitive / arguably wrong
> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 17:09:34 -0500
>
> =?iso-8859-5?B?stjb1d0gwtDc0d7S5tXS?= <v(dot)tambovtsev(at)outlook(dot)com> writes:
>> Any news on this bug? 9.4 still behaves wrong and this actively stops us from using Postgresql as a storage for our xml docs.
>
> AFAICS the conclusion in that thread was that the current behavior is
> correct; in particular xpath()'s output is still XML and so it must not
> de-escape anything.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/72DA66D9-0222-4888-AF55-61D3337CAC7A@phlo.org
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message lostcentaur 2015-02-03 22:52:42 BUG #12734: Postgresql not started after reboot
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-02-03 22:09:34 Re: BUG #8469: Xpath behaviour unintuitive / arguably wrong