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

Re: Why are default encoding conversions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why are default encoding conversions
Date: 2006-03-28 16:58:33
Message-ID: 3241.1143565113@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
>> Because with the current definition, any change in search_path really
>> ought to lead to repeating the lookup for the default conversion proc.
>> That's a bad idea from a performance point of view and I don't think
>> it's a particularly good idea from the definitional point of view
>> either --- do you really want the client conversion changing because
>> some function altered the search path?

> That argument does not strike me too strongly. I cannot imagine the
> case search_path changed so frequently.

I can.  There's been talk for example of having a search path associated
with every function definition, so that it might need to be changed at
every function call and return.  In any case I don't like the notion
that the client conversion is tied to search_path; they really should
be independent.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas HallgrenDate: 2006-03-28 17:11:00
Subject: Re: Shared memory
Previous:From: Tatsuo IshiiDate: 2006-03-28 16:52:13
Subject: Re: Why are default encoding conversions

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