Tom Lane wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> >> It looks like somebody rearranged the pg_enc enum without bothering to
> >> fix the tables that are affected by this.
> > I will look into this.
> Thank you. It might be worth adding a comment to pg_wchar.h listing all
> the places that need to be fixed when enum pg_enc changes.
I have developed the following patch against CVS. Tatsuo, you can use
it as a starting point. It adds a comment to encnames.c and reorders
utf8_and_iso8859.c to match the existing order. I also added the
missing entries at the bottom. I checked for pg_conv_map in the source
code and only utf8_and_iso8859.c has that structure, so I assume it is
the only one that also depends on the encnames.c ordering.
Looking at 8.0.X, it has the matching order, so we are OK there, but it
doesn't have the trailing entries. Tatsuo, are those needed?
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-12-22 03:29:02|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Better path-matching for package relocatability (was Re:|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-12-22 03:09:01|
|Subject: Re: BUG #2120: Crash when doing UTF8<->ISO_8859_8 encoding conversion |
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Qingqing Zhou||Date: 2005-12-22 03:49:45|
|Subject: Re: to_char and i18n|
|Previous:||From: Manuel Sugawara||Date: 2005-12-22 03:16:26|
|Subject: to_char and i18n|