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

Why are default encoding conversions namespace-specific?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Why are default encoding conversions namespace-specific?
Date: 2006-03-27 17:18:27
Message-ID: 15459.1143479907@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
See $SUBJECT.  It seems to me this is a bad idea for much the same
reasons that we recently decided default index operator classes should
not be namespace-specific:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg00284.php

I don't mind having encoding conversions be named within schemas,
but I propose that any given encoding pair be allowed to have only
one default conversion, period, and that when we are looking for
a default conversion we find it by a non-namespace-aware search.

With the existing definition, any change in search_path could
theoretically cause a change in client-to-server encoding conversion
behavior, and this just seems like a really bad idea.  (It's only
theoretical because we don't actually redo the conversion function
search on a search_path change ... but if you think the existing
definition is good then that's a bug.)

Comments?

			regards, tom lane

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas HallgrenDate: 2006-03-27 18:09:44
Subject: Re: Shared memory
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-03-27 16:45:04
Subject: Re: PANIC: heap_update_redo: no block

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