Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> We could attack this by including source database's encoding in the
>> shared-memory entries, and performing a conversion on the fly when
>> reading out the data.  However, what happens if the conversion fails?

> The most useful behavior would be to replace the untranslatable 
> characters with "?". I'm not sure how invasive the changes to the 
> conversion functions would be to support that.

I agree, but it looks like fairly massive changes would be needed,
starting with redefining the API for conversion functions to add
an error/noerror boolean.  Not something that I care to tackle
right now.  Maybe we shall just have to live with it for another
release.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: pg_stats queries versus per-database encodings at 2009-01-04 10:49:07 from Heikki Linnakangas

Responses

• Re: pg_stats queries versus per-database encodings at 2009-01-22 01:29:37 from Bruce Momjian

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Alvaro Herrera	Date: 2009-01-04 18:11:47
	Subject: Re: parallel restore
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2009-01-04 17:49:32
	Subject: Re: New patch for Column-level privileges