| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Postgresql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: db encoding |
| Date: | 2003-10-06 17:47:55 |
| Message-ID: | 29618.1065462475@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> However, from an initdb POV I am assuming that we are only interested in
> the name=>number conversion, even though initdb.sh does no apparent
> checking on the parameter it is passing to pg_encoding. Please tell me
> if this is incorrect.
That's correct. I believe we intended to eliminate pg_encoding as a
separate program altogether, given a C version of initdb, since the C
code could perfectly well call pg_char_to_encoding and
pg_valid_server_encoding for itself.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-10-06 18:01:00 | Re: db encoding |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-10-06 17:35:52 | db encoding |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-10-06 18:01:00 | Re: db encoding |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-10-06 17:35:52 | db encoding |