Tom Lane wrote on 21.05.2015 19:57:
One large concern about doing anything like this is whether future
versions of the SQL standard might blindside us with some
not-terribly-compatible interpretation of that syntax. If we do something
that is also in Oracle or DB2 or one of the other big boys, then we can
probably rely on the assumption that they'll block anything really
incompatible from becoming standardized ;-).
The SQL standard already specifies the format for "binary strings":
<binary string literal> ::=
X <quote> [ <space>... ] [ { <hexit> [ <space>... ] <hexit> [ <space>... ] }... ] <quote>
[ { <separator> <quote> [ <space>... ] [ { <hexit> [ <space>... ]
<hexit> [ <space>... ] }... ] <quote> }... ]
<hexit> ::=
<digit> | A | B | C | D | E | F | a | b | c | d | e | f
The data type for such a literal is somewhat "undefined":
It is implementation-defined whether the declared type of a <binary string literal>
is a fixed-length binary string type, a variable-length binary string type,
or a binary large object string type
But the above syntax seems to be only supported by H2, HSQLDB and Apache Derby.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
