On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> David Blewett <david@dawninglight.net> writes:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> Well, it might make sense to allow an ENCODING option attached to a COPY
>>> with a file source/destination. I remain of the opinion that overriding
>>> client_encoding on a transfer to/from the client is a bad idea.
>
>> I really don't see how it is any different from manually flipping the
>> client_encoding before/after the transfer.
>
> The difference is that the client-side code gets told that the encoding
> changed if you do the latter.
Do you mean at the protocol level?
All I was planning on having the patch do is the equivalent of the set
client_encoding dance. Wouldn't that be sufficent to notify the client
of the encoding change?
David Blewett
