Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof

From: Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof
Date: 2003-07-29 13:53:56
Message-ID: 1059486834.52827.7.camel@jester (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-jdbc
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 09:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Then why did we add a GUC variable "server_encoding" at all?
> 
> The JDBC guys wanted to know it.  Why is not clear to me, but I figured
> it was easy enough to make them happy.

It could still be useful for stored procedures (particularly Java ones)
which would have to deal with the encoding at the server.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Carlos Guzman AlvarezDate: 2003-07-29 14:04:16
Subject: Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-07-29 13:50:23
Subject: Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Fernando NasserDate: 2003-07-29 14:00:28
Subject: Re: Problem with LargeObject/jdbc when writing short (Repost)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-07-29 13:50:23
Subject: Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group