On Oct 5, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Probably not so much "assumed" as "nobody thought about it". In > e.g. plperl we expend the cycles to do encoding validity checking on > *every* string entering the system from Perl. I'm not sure why foreign > tables ought to get a pass on that, especially when you consider the > communication overhead that the encoding check would be amortized > against.
Yes, that’s what I was thinking. > Now, having said that, I think it has to be the reponsibility of the FDW > to apply any required check ... which makes this a bug report against > oracle_fdw, not the core system. (FWIW, contrib/file_fdw depends on the > COPY code, which will check encoding.) I agree that this is a bug in oracle_fdw (well, potentially; ultimately, it’s Oracle that’s lying about the encoding of those text values). But I think that it would be much more useful overall -- not to mention more database-like -- for PostgreSQL to provide a way to enforce it. That is, to consider foreign tables to be an input like COPY or SQL, and to validate values before displaying them. Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
