| From: | "Bo?ena Potempa" <Bozena(dot)Potempa(at)otc(dot)pl> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL+ Beta bug? |
| Date: | 2002-11-22 16:38:42 |
| Message-ID: | MKEIIFDEFPOPHIPFIFJCEEGADHAA.Bozena.Potempa@otc.pl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
>If it is implemented in the server I would implement it.
>However, it isn't implemented in the server and so
>there's no recommended way to store 0s in strings now.
>Even if 0s are stored in strings accidentally like your
>example shows, there are few code which take them into
>account and they would be lost before long. As for me
>I've never minded 0s in strings in the backend coding.
>
>I don't think your request is unreasonable but what
>you should request the change first seems from the
>backend side.
I will ask on pgsql-hackers and then return to ODBC.
Thank you very much for your help.
Bozena Potempa
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Graham Vickrage | 2002-11-22 17:10:39 | Re: Text field truncation problem |
| Previous Message | Hiroshi Inoue | 2002-11-22 14:50:17 | Re: Very large queries with ODBC |