Tom Lane wrote:
> The behavioral description sounds fine, but I was eagerly awaiting
> your description of exactly how you'd test for compatibility or
> search for a compatible encoding ... without that algorithm the whole
> thing's moot.
It's just an explicit list of things that spell similarly. There's not
much more we can do, but I don't see any obvious candidates were this
could lead to trouble.
> BTW, what happens if there is more than one apparently-matching
> encoding? (It might be best to error out in this case, on the theory
> that we evidently don't have a correct matching.)
I just won't put something like that into the list.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
