Jered Floyd <jered(at)permabit(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> You're right, there are multiple levels of parsing going on. The
>> string-literal parser gets first crack before the type-specific
>> input converter does. If you don't allow for that when counting
>> backslashes etc, you'll get confused for sure.
> Argh. This is really bad. This means, for example, that I can't have
> NULs in my bytea, which was the whole reason I was using bytea to
> begin with. Actually, maybe not.
Sure you can. You just have to write them as \000, which actually
will be written \\000 to get through the string-literal parser.
It's not a real *convenient* notation, I agree, but it works.
There has been talk of providing alternate paths, such as functions
that would convert bytea to and from other textual representations
like base64. Nothing's been done yet though.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Thomas Lockhart||Date: 2001-02-07 16:52:30|
|Subject: Re: Re: round - timestamp bug|
|Previous:||From: Jered Floyd||Date: 2001-02-07 16:18:40|
|Subject: Re: byteain() doesn't parse correctly|