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

Re: JSON for PG 9.2

From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>,Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>,Joey Adams <joeyadams3(dot)14159(at)gmail(dot)com>,"David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>,Claes Jakobsson <claes(at)surfar(dot)nu>,Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>,Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>,Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>,Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>,Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2
Date: 2012-01-31 18:29:59
Message-ID: 20120131182959.GA5577@toroid.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
At 2012-01-31 12:04:31 -0500, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
>
> That fails to answer the question of what we ought to do if we get an
> invalid sequence there.

I think it's best to categorically reject invalid surrogates as early as
possible, considering the number of bugs that are related to them (not
in Postgres, just in general). I can't see anything good coming from
letting them in and leaving them to surprise someone in future.

-- ams

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2012-01-31 18:32:31
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2012-01-31 18:17:25
Subject: no error context for index updates?

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