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

Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org,Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Subject: Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Date: 2004-12-31 19:21:16
Message-ID: 11457.1104520876@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers-win32
"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> We know it's broken and won't be fixed for 8.0.

> If we just #ifndef WIN32 the definitions in utils/mb/encnames.c it won't
> be possible to select that encoding, right? Will that have any other
> unwanted effects (such as breaking client encodings)? If not, I suggest
> this is done.

I believe the subscripts in those arrays have to match the encoding
enum type, so you can't just ifdef out individual entries.

> (Or perhaps something can be done in pg_valid_server_encoding?)

Making the valid_server_encoding function reject it might work.
Tatsuo-san would know for sure.

Should we also reject it as a client encoding, or does that work OK?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Roland VolkmannDate: 2004-12-31 20:26:43
Subject: Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-12-31 15:26:48
Subject: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32

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