Re: pl/perl and utf-8 in sql_ascii databases

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, badalex <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, cb <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pl/perl and utf-8 in sql_ascii databases
Date: 2012-07-17 18:12:15
Message-ID: 1342548452-sup-9344@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Excerpts from Kyotaro HORIGUCHI's message of mar jul 17 05:01:10 -0400 2012:

> > I think that's probably too much engineering for something that doesn't
> > really warrant it. A real solution to this problem could be to create
> > yet another new test file containing just this function definition and
> > the query that calls it, and have one expected file for each encoding;
> > but that's too much work and too many files, I'm afraid.
>
> I agree completely. The balance between the additional complexity
> of regress and the what we would get from the complexity...

I had to remove both that test and the one about the 0x80, because it
wasn't working for me in either SQL_ASCII or Latin1, I forget which.
I'm not sure I understand the reason for the failure -- I was getting a
false result instead of true, which was unexpected. Maybe there's a
trivial explanation for this .. or maybe it really is broken.

In any case, maybe it'd be a good idea to have more tests related to
encodings, if we can write them in some reasonable manner. But only in
HEAD, I guess, because having to backpatch stuff and test every branch
in at least three encodings is just too annoying.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2012-07-17 18:53:36 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Split contrib documentation into extensions and programs
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-07-17 18:01:10 Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes