Re: bytea vs. pg_dump

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, "Bernd Helmle" <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
Subject: Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Date: 2009-07-11 10:40:44
Message-ID: 200907111340.45985.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wednesday 08 July 2009 01:07:08 Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Here is a first cut at a new hex bytea input and output format. Example:
> > ...
> > SET bytea_output_hex = true;
> >
> > Should the configuration parameter be a boolean or an enum, opening
> > possibilities for other formats?
>
> Enum. If we do this then it seems entirely fair that someone might
> want other settings someday. Also, it seems silly to pick a format
> partly on the grounds that it's expansible, and then not make the
> control GUC expansible. Perhaps
>
> SET bytea_output = [ hex | traditional ]

OK, here is an updated patch. It has the setting as enum, completed
documentation, and libpq support. I'll add it to the commit fest in the hope
that someone else can look it over in detail.

I'm attaching two versions of the patch. One it made with the -w option,
which leads to less differences.

Attachment Content-Type Size
bytea-format.patch text/x-patch 17.2 KB
bytea-format-w.patch text/x-patch 16.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2009-07-11 10:50:17 Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?
Previous Message Theo Schlossnagle 2009-07-11 05:17:27 Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?