Re: default client encoding in postgresql.conf

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: default client encoding in postgresql.conf
Date: 2008-06-13 16:15:24
Message-ID: 12031.1213373724@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Robert Treat wrote:
>>> This conversation is beginning to suggest to me that client_encoding
>>> shouldn't be listed in postgresql.conf at all.
>>
>> Yeah, that sure seems better than what we currently have.

> I should have thought there was a good argument for preventing its being
> set in postgresql.conf.

No, I can think of cases where someone might legitimately want to do
that, they're just pretty far out of mainstream usage.

We already have some variables that are GUC_NOT_IN_SAMPLE but not
GUC_DISALLOW_IN_FILE, so I don't see anything wrong with considering
client_encoding the same way.

(BTW, sometime we ought to get around to enforcing GUC_DISALLOW_IN_FILE...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2008-06-13 16:18:37 Re: Proposal: Multiversion page api (inplace upgrade)
Previous Message Robert Treat 2008-06-13 15:54:20 Re: Overhauling GUCS