Nagy Karoly Gabriel wrote:
David Blewett wrote:
Today on IRC, someone was wondering what the preferred method of
exporting data in a specific encoding via COPY was. They reply was
wrapping the COPY command in "set client_encoding='foo';", which made
me wonder how hard it would be to add an add
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Blewett writes:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Well, it might make sense to allow an ENCODING option attached to a COPY
>>> with a file source/destination. I remain of the opinion that overriding
>>> client_encodin
David Blewett writes:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, it might make sense to allow an ENCODING option attached to a COPY
>> with a file source/destination. I remain of the opinion that overriding
>> client_encoding on a transfer to/from the client is a bad idea.
> I
David Blewett wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Well, it might make sense to allow an ENCODING option attached to a COPY
> > with a file source/destination. I remain of the opinion that overriding
> > client_encoding on a transfer to/from the client is a bad idea.
>
--On 15. Juli 2009 19:59:56 +0300 Nagy Karoly Gabriel
wrote:
I think that I was the one who wondered about that. Our use case is
related to moving data between different servers which have different
encodings. Ofcourse the encoding should be an option only when COPY
involves files.
I find
Apologies to Tom for the duplicate...
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, it might make sense to allow an ENCODING option attached to a COPY
> with a file source/destination. I remain of the opinion that overriding
> client_encoding on a transfer to/from the client is a bad
David Blewett wrote:
Today on IRC, someone was wondering what the preferred method of
exporting data in a specific encoding via COPY was. They reply was
wrapping the COPY command in "set client_encoding='foo';", which made
me wonder how hard it would be to add an additional WITH parameter to
the
David Blewett writes:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What is the point? You'd generally have client_encoding set correctly
>> for your usage anyway, and if you did not, the data could confuse your
>> client-side code terribly. Offering an option to let the backend send
>>
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> What is the point? You'd generally have client_encoding set correctly
> for your usage anyway, and if you did not, the data could confuse your
> client-side code terribly. Offering an option to let the backend send
> data in the "wrong" encoding
David Blewett writes:
> Today on IRC, someone was wondering what the preferred method of
> exporting data in a specific encoding via COPY was. They reply was
> wrapping the COPY command in "set client_encoding='foo';", which made
> me wonder how hard it would be to add an additional WITH parameter
Today on IRC, someone was wondering what the preferred method of
exporting data in a specific encoding via COPY was. They reply was
wrapping the COPY command in "set client_encoding='foo';", which made
me wonder how hard it would be to add an additional WITH parameter to
the actual COPY statement t
11 matches
Mail list logo
