Advertising
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
We can revert that if necessary. It will open up a hole, though. Take
your pick - spec compliance or validly coded data.
I would rather take CONVERT USING out altogether, than have an
implementation that so clearly disregards the spec as to not even return
a compatible datatype.
Other than the fact that it's supposed to return varchar, the spec's
description of what it converts to what seems about as clear as mud.
I suspect however that it can't really be implemented properly without
support for per-value (or at least per-column) encoding, which is
something we're nowhere near having. Maybe we *should* take it out
instead of using spec-defined syntax for a behavior that we made up
out of whole cloth.
Works for me. If there's no objection I'll start on that in a few days.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
