Re: [Bacula-users] Catastrophic changes to PostgreSQL 8.4

* Craig Ringer (craig@postnewspapers.com.au) wrote:
> ... so it's defaulting to SQL_ASCII, but actually supports utf-8 if your
> systems are all in a utf-8 locale. Assuming there's some way for the
> filed to find out the encoding of the director's database, it probably
> wouldn't be too tricky to convert non-matching file names to the
> director's encoding in the fd (when the director's encoding isn't
> SQL_ASCII, of course).

I'm not sure which piece of bacula connects to PostgreSQL, but whatever
it is, it could just send a 'set client_encoding' to the PG backend and
all the conversion will be done by PG..

> This also makes me wonder how filenames on Mac OS X and Windows are
> handled. I didn't see any use of the unicode-form APIs or any UTF-16 to
> UTF-8 conversion in an admittedly _very_ quick glance at the filed/
> sources. How does bacula handle file names on those platforms? Read them
> with the non-unicode APIs and hope they fit into the current non-unicode
> encoding? Or am I missing something?

Good question.

    Stephen