From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Roger Leigh <rleigh(at)codelibre(dot)net> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Brad T(dot) Sliger" <brad(at)sliger(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Roger Leigh <rleigh(at)debian(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Unicode UTF-8 table formatting for psql text output |
Date: | 2009-10-05 20:32:08 |
Message-ID: | 3154.1254774728@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Roger Leigh <rleigh(at)codelibre(dot)net> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2009 at 11:22:27PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Elsewhere in the psql code, notably in mbprint.c, we make the decision
>> on whether to apply certain Unicode-aware processing based on whether
>> the client encoding is UTF8. The same should be done here.
>>
>> There is a patch somewhere in the pipeline that would automatically set
>> the psql client encoding to whatever the locale says, but until that is
>> done, the client encoding should be the sole setting that rules what
>> kind of character set processing is done on the client side.
> OK, that makes sense to a certain extent. However, the characters
> used to draw the table lines are not really that related to the
> client encoding for data sent from the database (IMHO).
Huh? The data *in* the table is going to be in the client_encoding, and
psql contains no mechanisms that would translate it to something else.
Surrounding it with decoration in a different encoding is just a recipe
for breakage.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-10-05 20:59:05 | Re: [PATCH] Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2311) |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-10-05 19:51:04 | Re: Privileges and inheritance |