2012/4/25 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 2012/4/25 Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>:
>>> Sounds like a great idea for a PGXN module.
>> it is one variant - but with support some web technologies - XML,
>> JSON, I prefer this in core. Urlcode is one the most used code on
>> world now - implementation is simple - and it can be well integrated
>> with decode, encode functions.
> Embedding that in encode/decode sounds to me like a pretty horrid idea,
> actually, unless I misunderstand what you are talking about. URL
> encoding is a text-to-text transformation, no? If so, it doesn't fit
> into encode/decode, which presume a binary (bytea) decoded form. People
> would be needing to do entirely bogus text/bytea coercions to use
> such an implementation.
A motivation for this proposal is JSON. I found lot of situation where
content of some internet data was was encoded in this code.
> Ergo, this needs to be a separate function, and so the argument for
> putting it in core seems a bit weak to me. The net field demand for
> the feature, so far, has been zero.
ook - it can be implemented as independently or as part of
convert_from, convert_to function.
> regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2012-04-25 19:26:59|
|Subject: Re: 9.2 release notes, beta time? |
|Previous:||From: Garick Hamlin||Date: 2012-04-25 19:14:52|
|Subject: Re: proposal - urlencode, urldecode support|