| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "NTPT" <ntpt(at)centrum(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MULE_INTERNAL translation to win1250 |
| Date: | 2007-01-28 23:33:16 |
| Message-ID: | 26365.1170027196@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"NTPT" <ntpt(at)centrum(dot)cz> writes:
> Without "set client_encoding to win1250" query works. I am curious why there
> is a MULE_INTERNAL mentioned even when \l+ say that corresponding database
> is created with (and even all the cluster) LATIN2 encoding.
The conversions between LATIN2 and WIN1250 go by way of MULE_INTERNAL to
reduce duplication of code. It shouldn't make any difference to the end
result though. Are you sure that the characters you're using are
supposed to have representations in both character sets?
> May be a bug in charset translation routines of postgres ?
If you think that, you need to provide us with the exact codes that are
being mistranslated and what you think they should translate to.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ron Peterson | 2007-01-28 23:39:07 | Re: Limit on number of users in postgresql? |
| Previous Message | NTPT | 2007-01-28 22:18:30 | MULE_INTERNAL translation to win1250 |