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

Re: [NOVICE] LATIN2->UTF8 conversation with dblink

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
Cc: Ruzsinszky Attila <ruzsinszky(dot)attila(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] LATIN2->UTF8 conversation with dblink
Date: 2009-02-03 15:22:19
Message-ID: 26489.1233674539@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-novice
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hmm.  You can presumably fix this by setting client_encoding in the
>> dblink connection to match the encoding in use in the database it's
>> called in.  But I wonder why dblink doesn't just do that for you
>> automatically.

> But if you think automatically setting client encoding is appropriate, I 
> will make the change. Would it be classified as a bug (and therefore 
> something to backpatch) or a new feature?

You could make an argument either way; but given that we're not seeing
vast demand in this thread, I think I'd vote for not changing behavior
in the back branches.  It'd be good to get it into 8.4 though.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Ruzsinszky AttilaDate: 2009-02-03 18:52:38
Subject: Permanent dblink
Previous:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2009-02-03 02:31:30
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] LATIN2->UTF8 conversation with dblink

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2009-02-03 15:29:14
Subject: Re: Hot Standby (v9d)
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-02-03 15:19:13
Subject: Re: Hot Standby (v9d)

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