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

Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>
Cc: Alon Goldshuv <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com>,Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Date: 2005-06-03 21:16:20
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Bruce,
> Is there a good source of multi-byte copy data test cases?  What is
> currently done to test the trans-coding support? (where client and server
> encodings are different)
> I notice that the regression data in the CVS version of postgres does not
> seem to include cases other than the ASCII data, is there another source of
> data/cases we're missing?
> Also - Alon's looking into this, but it would appear that the presumption on
> EOL for two-byte encodings is 0x0a+0xNN, where 0x0a is followed by any byte.
> Similar for other current control characters (escape, delimiter).  Is there
> a definition of format and semantics for COPY with 2-byte encodings we
> should look at?
> I've looked at the code and the docs like sql-copy.html and the question is
> relevant because of the following case:
>   if newline were defined as 0x0a+0x00 as opposed to 0x0a+0xNN where N is
> arbitrary, we could parse using 16-bit logic.
>  however
>   if newline were defined as 0x0a+0xNN, we must use byte-wise parsing

We have two and three-byte encodings, so 16-bit seems like it wouldn't
work.  I am not aware of any specs except the C code itself.

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2005-06-03 21:31:04
Subject: Re: NOLOGGING option, or ?
Previous:From: Neeraj TharwaniDate: 2005-06-03 21:13:36
Subject: Regarding large objects!

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group