Re: pgtcl large object fix

From: Reinhard Max <max(at)suse(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mahlon Stacy <mcs(at)mayo(dot)edu>, "'pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgtcl large object fix
Date: 2003-08-07 10:10:44
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0308071203480.31993-100000@wotan.suse.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 18:02, Tom Lane wrote:

> Mahlon Stacy <mcs(at)mayo(dot)edu> writes:
> > Newer versions of TCL implement ByteArray objects which are
> > the best fit for Postgresql Large Object functions.
>
> How newer is "newer"? That is, what compatibility problems might we
> create if we make this change?

ByteArrays were introduced in Tcl 8.1 (March 1999) along with the
change to use UTF-8 as internal string encoding.

cu
Reinhard

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christian van der Leeden 2003-08-07 11:01:29 Follow up: range query with timestamp returns different result with index than without (7.3.3)
Previous Message Christian van der Leeden 2003-08-07 06:52:12 range query with timestamp returns different result with index than without (7.3.3)