2026年7月17日(金) 15:49 Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>:
>
> 2026年7月17日(金) 7:51 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 08:00:51AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > > That's what I call a historical artifact. Removing it looks to be
> > > simply a cleanup of pg_proc.dat. Will do so if there are no
> > > objections, freeing an OID is not a bad thing here.
> >
> > And done this part.
> >
> > > Documenting it would not hurt, yes. We use it a lot in the regression
> > > tests, perhaps some extensions would gain some portability ideas if we
> > > publish a few words about it.
> >
> > For this part, if somebody has a patch, feel free.
>
> I was feeling free, but the more I looked at it, the more horribly
> inconsistent and ugly
> "getdatabaseencoding()" is as a public SQL function name, and we have
> "pg_client_encoding()" already, so might as well rename it?
>
> Patch in separate thread:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB8KJ%3DiQQ3j1ZzJkgF_CGF5TvJsugp6JFOrS-LB7kT%3DXivV_Vg%40mail.gmail.com
The idea was not popular, so I submitted a plain documentation
patch: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/7029/
Regards
Ian Barwick
