Re: [HACKERS] Re: [hackers-jp: 219] Re: postgresql-8.1.4文字セットサポート

[Tom Lane]

I wrote:
 Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Just to confirm, it does look like there's a discrepancy between what  
 is in the documentation and the actual behavior of the server. The  
 documentation indicates that SJIS is a valid server encoding:

 This is a documentation error --- SJIS is certainly not a valid server
 encoding (it's not 8-bit-safe).  Will fix --- thanks for pointing it out.

Actually, table 21-2 does say that SJIS isn't supported as a server
encoding, but the text at the top of the page (before table 21-1) is
pretty misleading --- it implies that every character set we have
is allowed as a server-side encoding.  I'm going to change that text,
and also add a column to table 21-1 marking the supported server
encodings.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Re: [HACKERS] Re: [hackers-jp: 219] Re: postgresql-8.1.4文字セットサポート

[Tom Lane]

Michael Glaesemann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 Just to confirm, it does look like there's a discrepancy between what  
 is in the documentation and the actual behavior of the server. The  
 documentation indicates that SJIS is a valid server encoding:

This is a documentation error --- SJIS is certainly not a valid server
encoding (it's not 8-bit-safe).  Will fix --- thanks for pointing it out.

 createdb: database creation failed: ERROR:  SJIS is not a valid  
 encoding name

I wonder if it would be worth changing the code so that you get a
complaint saying the encoding is known but not allowed on the server
side.  It hasn't come up before, so maybe it's not worth the trouble
... but this message seems a bit confusing.

regards, tom lane

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend