Bo?ena Potempa wrote:
> >Hmm the difference may come from (non-)multibyte mode.
> I don't think so. My PostgreSQL on Linux installation is standard,
> without support for multibyte characters, without support for
> any national characterset and sorting. Just installed
> 'as is' on the fresh RedHat 7.3.
Isn't your PostgreSQL on Windows NT with multibyte suppoort ?
My environment is with multibyte support and so it doesn't
support non-null-terminated string.
> >> Now I am not sure which behaviour is correct (and planned
> >> by PostgreSQL developers).
> >As far as I see PostgreSQL couldn't handle non-null-terminated
> >strings correctly.
> OK. But I think, that even if some earlier versions of PostgreSQL
> do not support 0s in strings then later versions will support them.
> So ODBC driver should not cut strings containing zeroes, but
According to an ODBC related document, the behavior of ODBC
functions in such case is undefined and it is driver-specific
if a driver handles this correctly.
> insert/read data entirely making usage of provided length.
> Is it implemented like that?
No and how can I implement it ?
Must I convert '\0' to "|| chr(0) ||" where there's no
guarantee that it works ?
In response to
pgsql-odbc by date
|Next:||From: Schnetzer, Jerry||Date: 2002-11-20 01:32:38|
|Subject: Duplicate Table Names in PostgreSQL|
|Previous:||From: Bo?ena Potempa||Date: 2002-11-19 16:15:52|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL+ Beta bug?|