What is the difference between binary safe strings and binary unsafe strings?

According to Redis documentation, simple Redis strings have syntax "+redis_response\r\n" whereas bulk Redis strings have syntax "$str_len\r\nbinary_safe_string\r\n". In other words, binary safe string in Redis can contain any data as simple as "foo" to any binary data upto 512MB say a JEPG image. Binary safe string has its length encoded in it and does not terminate with any particular character such as a NULL terminating string in C which ends with '\0.

HTH, Swanand

I'm not familiar with the system in question, but the term "binary safe string" might be used either to describe certain string-storage types or to describe particular string instances. In a binary-safe string type, a string of length N may be used to encapsulate any sequence of N values in the range either 0-255 or 0-65535 (for 8- or 16-bit types, respectively). A binary-safe string instance might be one whose representation may be subdivided into uniformly-sized pieces, with each piece representing one character, as distinct from a string instance in which different characters require different amounts of storage space.

Some string types (which are not binary safe) will use variable-length representations for certain characters, and will behave oddly if asked to act upon e.g. a string which contains the code for "first half of a multi-part character" followed by something other than a "second half of multi-part character". Further, some code which works with strings will assume that it the Nth character will be stored in either the Nth byte or the Nth pair of bytes, and will malfunction if given a string in which, e.g. the 8th character is stored in the 12th and 13th pairs of bytes.

Looking only briefly at the link provided, I would guess that it's saying that the redis does not expect to only work with strings that use different numbers of bytes to hold different characters, though I'm not quite clear whether it's assuming that a string type will be able to handle any possible sequence of bytes, or whether it's assuming that any string instance which it's given may be safely regarded as a sequence of bytes. I think the fundamental concepts of interest, though, are (1) some string types use variable-length encodings and others do not; (2) even in types that use variable-length encodings, a useful subset of string instances will consist only of fixed-length characters.