Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew - Supernews
Subject Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling
Date
Msg-id slrnd9k2df.1d3v.andrew+nonews@trinity.supernews.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Simplifying unknown-literal handling  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2005-05-29, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@surnet.cl> writes:
>> On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 11:47:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Anyone see a reason not to change this?
>
>> Is there any way we use UNKNOWN to represent bytea literals?
>> Say, comparing a untyped literal to a bytea column?
>
> We use UNKNOWN to represent the raw string literal before we've
> figured out that we need to feed it to byteain.  There aren't
> going to be any embedded nulls at that point, if that's what
> you are wondering.

Are there any cases where UNKNOWN can be received from the frontend as
a binary value? I suspect there are.

-- 
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Escape handling in COPY, strings, psql
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Escape handling in COPY, strings, psql