Re: Why are default encoding conversions

> See $SUBJECT.  It seems to me this is a bad idea for much the same
> reasons that we recently decided default index operator classes should
> not be namespace-specific:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-02/msg00284.php
> 
> 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.

> With the existing definition, any change in search_path could
> theoretically cause a change in client-to-server encoding conversion
> behavior, and this just seems like a really bad idea.  (It's only
> theoretical because we don't actually redo the conversion function
> search on a search_path change ... but if you think the existing
> definition is good then that's a bug.)

Then why do we have CREATE DEFAULT CONVERSION command at all?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan