David Wheeler wrote:
> On Saturday, December 14, 2002, at 03:24 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I can't think of an ultimate solution. If we added a length to the
> > passed query string, so you could embed nulls, we would still have the
> > problem of handling the null once we split the query up into data
> > elements. The only solution there would be to add a length to all
> > passed data values, so we could handle nulls in them, but I doubt it is
> > worth the effort and added code complexity.
>
> No, but it might be worth it if PostgreSQL's PREPAREd statements
> created real functions. Then each value could be passed to the back-end
> individually, rather than in one big string. so instead of
>
> "execute stmt('val1', 'val2')"
>
> we could do:
>
> stmt(val1, val2);
>
> where "val1" and "val2" are actually variables that hold the values
> being passed.
Yes, thanks David. You are correct, and I meant to talk about that, but
by the time I got to the end of the email, I had forgotten.
We are looking to overhaul the wire protocol for 7.4, and one of the
TODO items is:
o Special passing of binary values in platform-neutral format (bytea?)
What this will allow us to do is to pass binary to the server as a
self-contained value, rather than inside the query string. This will
make things much easier for binary data.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
