Re: A documents mistaken of PG12.5 - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: A documents mistaken of PG12.5
Date
Msg-id 1cc5b81b-1c91-423c-be59-d0169404e796@iki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to A documents mistaken of PG12.5  ("qiuchenjun@highgo.com" <qiuchenjun@highgo.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On 30/11/2020 04:50, qiuchenjun@highgo.com wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I found the mistaken in the PG12.5,chapter 4.1.2.2
> whereas in chapter 4.1.1
> 
> I think 6-digit is right.

It seems correct to me as it is. Chapter 4.1.1 talks about this syntax:

postgres=# select U&'d\0061t\+000061';
  ?column?
----------
  data
(1 row)


Whereas chapter 4.1.2.2 talks about this syntax:

postgres=# select E'd\u0061t\U00000061';
  ?column?
----------
  data
(1 row)

The former indeed uses 6 digits, whereas the latter uses 8 digits.

- Heikki



pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Gustavsson Mikael
Date:
Subject: SV: SV: Problem with pg_notify / listen
Next
From: EffiSYS / Martin Querleu
Date:
Subject: Re: Update on