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

From qiuchenjun@highgo.com
Subject 回复: Re: A documents mistaken of PG12.5
Date
Msg-id 2020120109594563250511@highgo.com
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-bugs
Hi Heikki, 
Thank you very much.You are right.
I think I'm confusing the two syntax.
I think I need a deeper understanding and operation.


祝工作顺利!
-------------------------------------------
邱臣君
瀚高基础软件股份有限公司
网址:www.highgo.com 
地址:济南市高新区新泺大街2117号铭盛大厦20
手机:186-6081-2363  邮箱:qiuchenjun@highgo.com
 
发件人: Heikki Linnakangas
发送时间: 2020-11-30 17:02
主题: Re: A documents mistaken of PG12.5
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: James Coleman
Date:
Subject: Re: segfault with incremental sort
Next
From: PG Bug reporting form
Date:
Subject: BUG #16754: When using LLVM and parallel queries aborted all session by pg_cancel_backend.