Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> In particular, I would like to suggest that the current representation of
>> \u0000 is fundamentally broken and that we have to change it, not try to
>> band-aid around it. This will mean an on-disk incompatibility for jsonb
>> data containing U+0000, but hopefully there is very little of that out
>> there yet. If we can get a fix into 9.4.1, I think it's reasonable to
>> consider such solutions.
>>
>> The most obvious way to store such data unambiguously is to just go ahead
>> and store U+0000 as a NUL byte (\000). The only problem with that is that
>> then such a string cannot be considered to be a valid value of type TEXT,
>> which would mean that we'd need to throw an error if we were asked to
>> convert a JSON field containing such a character to text.
> Hm, does this include text out operations for display purposes? If
> so, then any query selecting jsonb objects with null bytes would fail.
> How come we have to error out? How about a warning indicating the
> string was truncated?
No, that's not a problem, because jsonb_out would produce an escaped
textual representation, so any null would come out as \u0000 again.
The trouble comes up when you do something that's supposed to produce
a *non escaped* text equivalent of a JSON string value, such as
the ->> operator.
Arguably, ->> is broken already with the current coding, in that
these results are entirely inconsistent:
regression=# select '{"a":"foo\u0040bar"}'::jsonb ->> 'a';
?column?
----------
foo@bar
(1 row)
regression=# select '{"a":"foo\u0000bar"}'::jsonb ->> 'a';
?column?
--------------
foo\u0000bar
(1 row)
regression=# select '{"a":"foo\\u0000bar"}'::jsonb ->> 'a';
?column?
--------------
foo\u0000bar
(1 row)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
