From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Ruzsinszky Attila <ruzsinszky(dot)attila(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [NOVICE] LATIN2->UTF8 conversation with dblink |
Date: | 2009-02-03 02:31:30 |
Message-ID: | 4987AC82.8030608@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Ruzsinszky Attila <ruzsinszky(dot)attila(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The DB is the same except the character coding. Source is LATIN2 and
>> the target DB is UTF8.
>> We wrote a trigger to copy the data from source to target with dblink.
>> The problem is the
>> different DB character coding! PGSQL complains about wrong byte order.
>
> Hmm. You can presumably fix this by setting client_encoding in the
> dblink connection to match the encoding in use in the database it's
> called in. But I wonder why dblink doesn't just do that for you
> automatically.
Mainly because I never thought about it myself before, and this is the
first time I've seen someone complain ;-)
But if you think automatically setting client encoding is appropriate, I
will make the change. Would it be classified as a bug (and therefore
something to backpatch) or a new feature?
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-02-03 03:00:10 | Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-02-03 02:26:24 | Re: add_path optimization |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-02-03 15:22:19 | Re: [NOVICE] LATIN2->UTF8 conversation with dblink |
Previous Message | Nikhil teltia | 2009-02-02 23:35:52 | Function Returning a Set of Composite Value |