Re: bytea vs. pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Date
Msg-id 200907111340.45985.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: bytea vs. pg_dump  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
List pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday 08 July 2009 01:07:08 Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Here is a first cut at a new hex bytea input and output format.  Example:
> > ...
> > SET bytea_output_hex = true;
> >
> > Should the configuration parameter be a boolean or an enum, opening
> > possibilities for other formats?
>
> Enum.  If we do this then it seems entirely fair that someone might
> want other settings someday.  Also, it seems silly to pick a format
> partly on the grounds that it's expansible, and then not make the
> control GUC expansible.  Perhaps
>
>     SET bytea_output = [ hex | traditional ]

OK, here is an updated patch.  It has the setting as enum, completed 
documentation, and libpq support.  I'll add it to the commit fest in the hope 
that someone else can look it over in detail.

I'm attaching two versions of the patch.  One it made with the -w option, 
which leads to less differences.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Theo Schlossnagle
Date:
Subject: Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?