Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On ons, 2010-09-22 at 19:25 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> I still wonder if, rather than making this configurable, the right
>> choice is to force logging to UTF-8 (with BOM) across the board,
> I don't think this would make things better or easier. At some point
> you're going to have to insert a recode call, and it doesn't matter much
> whether the destination argument is a constant or a variable.
It'd avoid the problem of having possibly-unconvertable messages ...
at the cost of pissing off users who have a uniform server encoding
selection already and don't see why they should be forced to deal with
UTF8 in the log.
It's pretty much just one step from here to deciding that the server
should work exclusively in UTF8 and never mind all those other legacy
encodings. We've resisted that attitude for quite some years now,
and are probably not really ready to adopt it for the log either.
regards, tom lane