Re: Shouldn't default multibyte encoding come from template database?

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Shouldn't default multibyte encoding come from template database?
Date: 2000-11-14 04:57:50
Message-ID: 3.0.5.32.20001114155750.02baacc0@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 23:31 13/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Seems to me that it'd make more sense to
>default to the encoding used by the DB you're copying. Comments?

Definitely. Especially when/if people start using 'WITH TEMPLATE' for more
databases.

>It's actually a little worrisome that we even allow selection of
>encoding during CREATE DATABASE. If template1 (or any other source
>database) contains non-ASCII data

It is probably woth issuing a NOTICE or WARNING when the requested encoding
is different to the template.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2000-11-14 05:38:57 Question about CleanupProc()
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-11-14 04:31:27 Shouldn't default multibyte encoding come from template database?