Re: Questionabl description in datatype.sgml

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Questionabl description in datatype.sgml
Date: 2016-06-18 15:58:58
Message-ID: 13601.1466265538@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> In "8.13.2. Encoding Handling"
> <para>
> When using binary mode to pass query parameters to the server
> and query results back to the client, no character set conversion
> is performed, so the situation is different. In this case, an
> encoding declaration in the XML data will be observed, and if it
> is absent, the data will be assumed to be in UTF-8 (as required by
> the XML standard; note that PostgreSQL does not support UTF-16).
> On output, data will have an encoding declaration
> specifying the client encoding, unless the client encoding is
> UTF-8, in which case it will be omitted.
> </para>

> In the first sentence shouldn't "no character set conversion" be "no
> encoding conversion"? PostgreSQL is doing client/server encoding
> conversion, rather than character set conversion.

I think the text is treating "character set conversion" as meaning
the same thing as "encoding conversion"; certainly I've never seen
any place in our docs that draws a distinction between those terms.
If you think there is a difference, maybe we need to define those
terms somewhere.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-06-18 16:14:17 Re: Whether to back-patch fix for aggregate transtype width estimates
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-06-18 15:56:51 Re: forcing a rebuild of the visibility map