Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database?
Date: 2001-02-14 23:11:44
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0102150009020.1112-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane writes:

> We now have defenses against running a non-LOCALE-enabled backend in a
> database that was created in non-C locale. Shouldn't we likewise
> prevent a non-MULTIBYTE-enabled backend from running in a database with
> a multibyte encoding that's not SQL_ASCII? Or am I missing a reason why
> that is safe?

Not all multibyte encodings are actually "multi"-byte, e.g., LATIN2. In
that case the main benefit is the on-the-fly recoding between the client
and the server. If a non-MB server encounters that database it should
still work.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-02-14 23:15:04 Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-02-14 23:05:14 Re: Open 7.1 items