Tom Lane said: > Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I don't mind having encoding conversions be named within schemas, but >>> I propose that any given encoding pair be allowed to have only one >>> default conversion, period, and that when we are looking for a >>> default conversion we find it by a non-namespace-aware search. > >> That doesn't sound good idea to me. > > What does it mean to have different "default" encoding conversions in > different schemas? Even if this had a sensible interpretation, I don't > think the existing code implements it properly.
perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but why not just resolve the namespace at the time the default conversion is created? cheers andrew ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
