Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more connection

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);
> >
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  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