Re: Psycgop1 vs Psycopg2
От | Daniele Varrazzo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Psycgop1 vs Psycopg2 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTinwnyH0BfZ1ALTipeyHiYt5mmsLb44wDqez-Wxm@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Psycgop1 vs Psycopg2 (Richard Harley <raharley0@googlemail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Psycgop1 vs Psycopg2
|
Список | psycopg |
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Richard Harley <raharley0@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hello all > > I've noticed Psycopg2 handles escaping backslashes differently to > Psycopg1. Currently we use psycopg1 in a large school registration > system which uses a lot of these (think AM / PM \). I think the DA is > sending them though to postgres as \\. But psycopg2 is escaping the next > character - ('a','b','c','/<----) causing issues. On one hand I want to > upgrade to psycopg2 because I know 1 is getting on a bit now...but it > works for the job. Do I need to be overly concerned about how old > Psycopg1 is now? Is upgrading to 2 going to be worth the headache? Hi, I'm not getting exactly what is the escaped character causing problems: could you send a more detailed example? The query and arguments you are executing, what are you expecting to receive on the postgres side and what you are really receiving (it may be handy to bump the PG logging level to log all the statements fora while in order to obtain these informations). I am not really expecting the escaped version of the query to be used for anything else but for the database to run it, so your report surprises me. Also, what postgres version are you using? Escaping rules are different according to the standard_conforming_string setting and whether your PG version supports it. -- Daniele
В списке psycopg по дате отправления: