Re: invalid UTF-8 via pl/perl - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: invalid UTF-8 via pl/perl
Date
Msg-id 7619.1262549831@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: invalid UTF-8 via pl/perl  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> There are two issues with this patch. First, how far if at all should it 
> be backpatched? All the way, or 8.3, where we tightened the encoding 
> rules, or not at all?

Forgot to mention --- I'm not in favor of backpatching.  First because
tightening encoding verification has been a process over multiple
releases; it's not a bug fix in the normal sense of the word, and might
break things that people had been doing without trouble.  Second because
I think we'll have to change pg_verifymbstr's API, and that's not
something to back-patch if we can avoid it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: invalid UTF-8 via pl/perl
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: ERROR: record type has not been registered