| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: bytea vs standard_conforming_strings |
| Date: | 2006-11-23 04:28:36 |
| Message-ID: | 200611230428.kAN4Sa714977@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
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 is obsolete because it assumes that standard_conforming_strings is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(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| /rtmp/diff | text/x-diff | 4.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Schiltknecht | 2006-11-23 15:33:58 | Re: PostgreSQL Documentation of High Availability and Load |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-23 03:50:25 | Re: "recovering prepared transaction" after server |