On Wednesday 25 November 2009 23:01:35 Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >> One more question: Per my reading of the discussion (which very well
> >> might be flawed), wasnt the plan to limit the availale characters in the
> >> application name to ascii?
> > That was suggested, but I thought the eventual outcome was to not bother.
> I think that's really essential, not optional. The proposed patch will
> transfer the application name from one backend to another without any
> encoding conversion. If it contains non-ASCII characters that will
> result in injection of badly-encoded data inside the backend, which is
> something we have been trying hard to avoid in recent versions.
Isn't that similarly the case with pg_stat_activity?
> ISTM restricting the name to ASCII-only is the most reasonable tradeoff.
> Of course, as a speaker of English I may be a bit biased here --- but
> doing nothing about the issue doesn't seem acceptable.
I actually having a hard time imaging a use case where this would be a real
problem...
I have to admit though that while I am not from a English speaking country but
from Germany the amount of non ASCII chars used there routinely is not that
big, so ...
Andres