Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof
Date
Msg-id 9167.1059402412@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Passing server_encoding to the client is not future-proof  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Has anyone thought of what will happen to the server_encoding parameter
> when the character set/encoding will be settable for individual columns
> and the concept of a global server encoding will go away?  What will
> happen to clients that make use of this parameter?

I would imagine that we'd keep the concept of a per-database encoding,
but it would be become a default value for per-column encoding choices,
rather than the One True Value.  Clients could probably still make use
of server_encoding, though I'm unclear on what they'd use it for now,
let alone then.  ISTM client_encoding is the only setting the client
need deal with directly.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: "is_superuser" parameter creates inconsistencies
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: SQLSTATEs for warnings