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

From Andrew - Supernews
Subject Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling
Date
Msg-id slrnd9k8df.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
List pgsql-hackers
On 2005-05-29, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com> writes:
>> Are there any cases where UNKNOWN can be received from the frontend as
>> a binary value? I suspect there are.
>
> Sure, but that's transparent because we have binary I/O converters.
> You will have trouble if you try to inject an embedded zero that way,
> but the end result will look about the same as when you try to inject
> an embedded zero now: the data after the zero will be dropped on readout.

What happens if you send an UNKNOWN from the frontend as binary, and then
when the desired type is figured out, it turns out to be a bytea? It's
obviously not acceptable then to truncate after a zero byte.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Simplifying unknown-literal handling