Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Maybe not, but at the very least we should consider getting it fixed in >> 9.5 rather than waiting a full development cycle. Same as in >> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150428131549.ga25...@momjian.us >> I'm not saying we MUST include it in 9.5, but we should at least >> consider it. If we simply stash it in the open CF we guarantee that it >> will linger there for a year.
> Sure, if somebody has the time to put into it now, I'm fine with that. > I'm afraid it won't be me, though: even if I had the time, I don't > know enough about encodings. I concur that we should at least consider this patch for 9.5. I've added it to https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.5_Open_Items I'm willing to look at it myself, whenever my non-copious spare time permits; but that won't be in the immediate future. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
