On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> What is the point? You'd generally have client_encoding set correctly
> for your usage anyway, and if you did not, the data could confuse your
> client-side code terribly. Offering an option to let the backend send
> data in the "wrong" encoding does NOT seem like a good idea to me.
The use case was that the client connection was using one encoding,
but needed to output the file in a different encoding. So they would
have to do the "set client_encoding" dance each time they wanted to
export the file. I don't see how it's "wrong", especially considering
there is already a method to do this, albeit cumbersome. I consider it
simply syntactic sugar over existing functionality.
David Blewett
