| From: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <jconway(at)cox(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tuptoaster.c must *not* use SnapshotAny |
| Date: | 2002-01-18 07:48:10 |
| Message-ID: | 3C47D33A.3A514CC8@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> > Though I've often seen the reference to bytea BLOB
> > I remember no clear negation. Don't we have to negate
> > it clearly from the first ?
> >
> > regards,
> > Hiroshi Inoue
>
> With the changes in 7.2, bytea is actually very close to matching the
> SQL99 definition of binary strings, which it also refers to as BLOB.
> BLOBS should include support for (section 4.3):
>
> <comparison predicate> - yes
> <blob concatenation> - yes
> <blob substring function> - yes
> <blob overlay function> - no
> <trim function> - yes
> <length expression> - yes
> <position expression> - yes
> <like predicate> - yes
> Other than the overlay function,
It seems good as long as they are not large(huge ?).
It seems a significant flaw for bytea to have no
possibility of partial update.
> the primary thing missing is the use of
> hex as the I/O representation.
I don't love the current I/O representation of bytea.
It seems worth adding a new data type only to change the
binary I/O representation.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Murray Prior Hobbs | 2002-01-18 13:37:59 | pltlc and pltlcu problems |
| Previous Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2002-01-18 07:23:41 | Re: age() function? |