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

Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings

From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: "Mark Mielke *EXTERN*" <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(dot)debian(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,"Alex Hunsaker" <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>,"Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,"PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 and standard_conforming_strings
Date: 2010-02-02 09:13:42
Message-ID: D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C20393813C@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Mark Mielke wrote:
> On 01/29/2010 09:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Maybe.  We concluded in the April 2009 thread that
> > standard_conforming_strings = ON had gotten little or no field testing,
> > and I don't see any strong reason to hope that it's gotten much more
> > since then.
> 
> Not to contradict any justifiable investigation, but just as 
> a data point:
> 
> All of my installations use:
> 
> backslash_quote = off   # on, off, or safe_encoding
> escape_string_warning = off
> standard_conforming_strings = on
> 
> I have not encountered any problems so far. I use PostgreSQL in about 10 
> production applications (too tired to count them out :-) ), from psql to 
> PHP to Perl to Java. I had also assumed this feature was tested and 
> supported when I enabled it, as it seemed to me to be the only sensible 
> implementation, and it was consistent with my interpretation of SQL. I 
> had done some testing before enabling it the first time and was 
> satisfied with the results.

FWIW, I also turn it on by default in my company's installations and
revert it if there are problems.

These problems are usually carelessly written third party applications.
We discovered one omission in Npgsql which was fixed quickly.

To the best of my knowledge, JDBC and Npgsql are ready for
standard_conforming_strings=on.

I am all for changing it as soon as reasonably possible.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael MeskesDate: 2010-02-02 14:15:22
Subject: Re: NaN/Inf fix for ECPG Re: out-of-scope cursor errors
Previous:From: Boszormenyi ZoltanDate: 2010-02-02 09:03:21
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Provide rowcount for utility SELECTs

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