Re: [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alex Pilosov
Subject Re: [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSO.4.10.10106230837360.29168-100000@spider.pilosoft.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea  (Alex Pilosov <alex@pilosoft.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Re: [PATCH] by request: base64 for bytea  (Marko Kreen <marko@l-t.ee>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 23 Jun 2001, Marko Kreen wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 09:55:46PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
> 
> > > Attached is a patch (including documentation this time :) containing two
> > > functions, base64_encode(bytea) and base64_decode(text) with obvious
> > > functionality.
> 
> Btw, there are functions in form encode(data, 'base64'),
> decode(data, 'base64') in contrib/pgcrypto.  They do also
> encode(data, 'hex').  In the future I need to do probably
> encode(data, 'pgp-armor') too...
> 
> I agree those functionality should be in core code, and if
> the Alex ones get there, maybe he could use same interface?
Oy, I didn't notice them in contrib/pgcrypt.

Bruce, you can take my patch out of queue, stuff in pgcrypt is far more
comprehensive than what I done.

> Or I can extract it out from pgcrypto and submit to core ;)
> I simply had not a need for it because I used those with
> pgcrypto, but Alex seems to hint that there would be bit of
> interest otherwise too.
I think encode/decode should be part of core, as they are basic functions
to manipulate bytea data...

-alex



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: psql+openssl+uniware7