Re: GB18030-2022 Support in PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From John Naylor
Subject Re: GB18030-2022 Support in PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id CANWCAZatz81baBrDnKOt6DWS58z9xwMn_5tBO=U0k9CuLX=nzg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: GB18030-2022 Support in PostgreSQL  (Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: GB18030-2022 Support in PostgreSQL
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 1:36 PM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that patch could be separate, because the makefile changes are generic to all map files. The current GB18030
patchdoesn't depend on that makefile patch at all. The makefile patch just makes build a little bit easier upon map
filechanges. 

I verified that both autoconf and meson builds pick up the change with
these two patches, and the new test passes. I'm still not sure what
circumstances you found where a change doesn't get picked up, but we
can come back to that later if need be.

BTW, the Commitfest shows these patches as "needs rebase". The reason
for that is the naming. Commands like `git am` apply a series in
order, and expects to find something like
v3-0001-*
v3-0002-*

Your last attachment was
v1-0001-*
v2-0001-*

...and confusingly v2 needed to be applied first. To create a series
from a branch, use `git format-patch master -v <version number>` and
it will output an ordered series with one patch per commit.

--
John Naylor
Amazon Web Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Daniil Davydov
Date:
Subject: Re: POC: Parallel processing of indexes in autovacuum
Next
From: "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)"
Date:
Subject: RE: ReplicationSlotRelease() crashes when the instance is in the single user mode