| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Karsten Hilbert <Karsten(dot)Hilbert(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: encoding of PostgreSQL messages |
| Date: | 2009-02-11 16:00:31 |
| Message-ID: | 10045.1234368031@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Reflecting on the bigger picture ... I would imagine that the vast
>> majority of existing applications depend on client_encoding settings
>> that come from postgresql.conf, ALTER USER SET, ALTER DATABASE SET, or
>> just the default (== database encoding). I don't think a solution that
>> penalizes those cases and makes only the case of setting it via
>> PGCLIENTENCODING work nicely is going to make very many people happy.
> I don't have any survey data available, but I think this assessment is
> semantically wrong. Usefully, the client encoding can come only from
> the client, or be defaulted (and even that is semantically wrong).
In an ideal world, perhaps so, but do you deny my point that that's not
reality?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-02-11 16:11:25 | Re: Tsearch2 Trigger Problem: pg_catalog.simple does not exist |
| Previous Message | SHARMILA JOTHIRAJAH | 2009-02-11 15:58:10 | Re: dbi_link help |