From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Roger Leigh <rleigh(at)codelibre(dot)net>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: garbage in psql -l |
Date: | 2009-11-24 19:11:25 |
Message-ID: | 21832.1259089885@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> why 8.4 has no real problem ?
Because we never tried to use utf8 table decoration before. This
is collateral damage from Roger Leigh's recent patches.
The problem is evidently that Oleg is depending on ~/.psqlrc to
set client_encoding the way he wants it, but that file does not
get read for a "psql -l" invocation. (Probably not for -c either.)
The locale environment really isn't at issue because we do not look
at it to establish client encoding. Perhaps Oleg should be setting
PGCLIENTENCODING instead of depending on ~/.psqlrc, but I suspect
he's not the only one doing it that way.
There has been some talk of altering the rules for setting psql's
default client_encoding. We could think about that, or we could
back off trying to use linestyle=unicode without an explicit setting.
If we do neither, I suspect we'll be hearing more complaints. I'll
bet there are lots of people who are using database encoding = UTF8
but don't actually have unicode-capable terminal setups. It's never
hurt them before, especially not if they aren't really storing any
non-ASCII data.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-24 19:19:27 | Re: garbage in psql -l |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-11-24 19:10:57 | Re: garbage in psql -l |