2015-07-02 17:02 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > > Does the COPY line protocol even support binary data? > > The protocol, per se, just transmits a byte stream. There is a field > in the CopyInResponse/CopyOutResponse messages that indicates whether > a text or binary copy is being done. One thing we'd have to consider > is whether "raw" mode is sufficiently different from binary to justify > an additional value for this field, and if so whether that constitutes > a protocol break. sql/plpgsql_check_passive-9.6.sql >
> IIRC, psql wouldn't really care; it just transfers the byte stream to or > from the target file, regardless of text or binary mode. But there might > be other client libraries that are smarter and expect "binary" mode to > mean the binary file format specified in the COPY reference page. So > there may be value in being explicit about "raw" mode in these messages. > The safe way is create new mode and propagate it on client. It should to not break any current applications, because no one uses COPY RAW. > > A key point in all this is that people who need "raw" transfer probably > need it in both directions, a point that your SELECT proposal cannot > satisfy, but hacking COPY could. So I lean towards the latter really. > yes, it has sense. I am not sure, if I'll have time to implement it in this step, but I'll look on it. regards Pavel > > regards, tom lane >
