Re: UTF8 with BOM support in psql

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UTF8 with BOM support in psql
Date: 2009-10-20 14:36:46
Message-ID: 26930.1256049406@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Seems there is community support for accepting BOM:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01625.php

That discussion has approximately nothing to do with the
much-more-invasive change that Itagaki-san is suggesting.

In particular I think an automatic change of client_encoding isn't
particularly a good idea --- wouldn't you have to change it back later,
and is there any possibility of creating a security issue from such
behavior? Remember that client_encoding *IS* tied to security issues
such as backslash escape handling.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2009-10-20 14:40:13 Re: Application name patch - v2
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-20 14:32:56 Re: Controlling changes in plpgsql variable resolution