Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bytea binary compatible

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bytea binary compatible
Date: 2001-06-24 02:43:02
Message-ID: 200106240243.f5O2h2s23137@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Here is a patch to make bytea binary compatible with other text data
> > types.  Comments?
> 
> No way!  Unless you propose to make the text types null-safe (which
> would mean such nontrivial projects as replacing strcoll()).
> 
> The fact that the storage formats are both struct varlena does not
> mean that these types are interchangeable.  I fail to see where it'd
> be a good idea to mark them binary-compatible, even if there weren't
> serious implementation issues.

OK, code backed out.  If the storage formats are the same, doesn't that
make them binary compatibile.  I know the NULL issue though.  I think I
see what you mean, that a text function can't operate on a bytea field.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-24 03:10:48
Subject: Re: Bytea binary compatible
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-24 00:39:22
Subject: Re: Bytea binary compatible

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group