Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more connection - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From scott.marlowe
Subject Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more connection
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.33.0402041019540.28633-100000@css120.ihs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more  (Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>)
Responses Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more
List 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);
> >
>


pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: storing true/false, was: Comments on adding more