From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <g(dot)tomassoni(at)libero(dot)it> |
Subject: | Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more connection |
Date: | 2004-02-04 17:20:14 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0402041019540.28633-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Sorry, since this is the jdbc list I kinda assumed you were talking about
how jdbc was storing true and false...
On 4 Feb 2004, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Scott,
>
> This is a backend thing, 'f' 't' are boolean values for the backend, we
> don't attempt to parse and change things.
>
> Dave
> On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 11:36, scott.marlowe wrote:
> > On 3 Feb 2004, Dave Cramer wrote:
> >
> > > Kris,
> > >
> > > I also have a few more,
> > >
> > > one to change the behaviour for handling booleans, from inserting 't',
> > > 'f' to inserting '1', and '0'
> > >
> > > I think one way to deal with this on a non-connection basis is to use
> > > System properties, this won't work for the schema search path, but would
> > > work for most others.
> > >
> > > How do the other drivers handle this?
> >
> > Why not store TRUE and FALSE with no ticks. Like DEFAULT and NULL they're
> > keywords that mean the exact thing, not an internal representation that
> > might change over time.
> >
> > insert into table1 (tf) values (TRUE);
> >
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2004-02-04 17:52:04 | Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2004-02-04 17:17:14 | Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more |