Re: Correctly producing array literals for prepared statements
От | Andrew Chernow |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Correctly producing array literals for prepared statements |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D656F65.7040208@esilo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Correctly producing array literals for prepared statements (Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Correctly producing array literals for prepared
statements
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/23/2011 3:06 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On 23 February 2011 15:34, Merlin Moncure<mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote: >> You can send nested arrays safely. You just have to be very formal >> about escaping *everything* both as you get it and as it goes into the >> container. This is what postgres does on the backend as it sends >> arrays out the door in text. It might be instructive to see what the >> server does in terms of escaping. Note that the way this works it's >> not impossible to see 128+ consecutive backslashes when dealing with >> arrays of composites. > > Sounds tedious. > It is tedious, which is one reason why libpqtypes went binary. There are some compelling performance reasons as well that affect both client and server. libpqtypes was originally developed to serve a very particular need and wasn't aiming to be general purpose. That came about along the way trying to solve the problem. Personally, PQexec is dead to me as well as text results from a C/C++ app. I see no advantage over libpqtypes in that context. Unless I am missing your ultimate goal, you'd probably get what you want by wrapping libpqtypes. -- Andrew Chernow eSilo, LLC global backup http://www.esilo.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: