| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: nvarchar notation accepted? |
| Date: | 2010-05-14 04:00:36 |
| Message-ID: | 13535.1273809636@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Actually, the lexer translates N'foo' to NCHAR 'foo' and then the
>> grammar treats that just like CHAR 'foo'. In short, the N doesn't do
>> anything very useful, and it certainly doesn't have any effect on
>> encoding behavior. I think this is something Tom Lockhart put in ten or
>> so years back, and never got as far as making it actually do anything
>> helpful.
> so, the N'' syntax is fine and i don't need to hunt them as a migration step?
As long as the implied cast to char(n) doesn't cause you problems, it's
fine.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-05-14 04:03:45 | Generalized Inverted Generalized Search Tree |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2010-05-14 03:58:29 | Re: nvarchar notation accepted? |