Re: Patch for bug #12845 (GB18030 encoding)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Arjen Nienhuis <a(dot)g(dot)nienhuis(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch for bug #12845 (GB18030 encoding)
Date: 2015-05-06 21:33:03
Message-ID: 7448.1430947983@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)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.GA25925@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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-05-06 21:34:45 Re: BRIN range operator class
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2015-05-06 21:30:37 Re: INSERT ... ON CONFLICT syntax issues