bytea vs standard_conforming_strings

Started by Tom Laneover 19 years ago2 messagesdocs
Jump to latest
#1Tom Lane
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us

The discussion of bytea in section 8.4,
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/datatype-binary.html
is obsolete because it assumes that standard_conforming_strings is
always OFF. It could be very much simpler and shorter if
standard_conforming_strings were always ON, but that's not reality
either. Anyone have an idea on how to rewrite it in a way that
isn't awkward, incomprehensible, or both?

regards, tom lane

#2Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Tom Lane (#1)
Re: bytea vs standard_conforming_strings

Tom Lane wrote:

The discussion of bytea in section 8.4,
http://developer.postgresql.org/pgdocs/postgres/datatype-binary.html
is obsolete because it assumes that standard_conforming_strings is
always OFF. It could be very much simpler and shorter if
standard_conforming_strings were always ON, but that's not reality
either. Anyone have an idea on how to rewrite it in a way that
isn't awkward, incomprehensible, or both?

I added two "(assuming <varname>standard_conforming_strings</> is
<literal>off</>)" clauses in the bytea docs. Patch attached, sorry for
the new wrapping.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Attachments:

/rtmp/difftext/x-diffDownload+57-57