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

Re: Database->ServerEncoding, ClientEncoding

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "'jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr'" <jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr>,pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database->ServerEncoding, ClientEncoding
Date: 2002-02-26 10:30:25
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr] 
> Sent: 26 February 2002 09:44
> To: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Database->ServerEncoding, 
> ClientEncoding
> > ServerEncodingID (Long)
> > ServerEncodingName (String)
> I still wonder why ServerEncodingID is needed. It adds 
> complexity to pgSchema 
> without beeing used. Can't ServerEncodingID be masked? 
> > ClientEncodingID (Long)
> > The ClientEncodingID would be the Windows LCID (I assume that's 
> > relevant in this case)
> To you plan to use ClientEncodingID to select fonts? What is 
> LCID for? My 
> knowledge is very little in this field.

so's mine - I thought I was learning from you!!

LCID is the Windows Locale ID

If it's not important, ignore it.

Regards, Dave.


pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Jean-Michel POUREDate: 2002-02-26 10:53:33
Subject: Re: Database->ServerEncoding, ClientEncoding
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2002-02-26 10:19:20
Subject: Re: fake vs real CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group