Re: What's a correct or good Encoding for Postgres 9.1.2?
| От | John R Pierce |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: What's a correct or good Encoding for Postgres 9.1.2? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4FC65EBF.10005@hogranch.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: What's a correct or good Encoding for Postgres 9.1.2? (Khangelani Gama <kgama@argility.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: What's a correct or good Encoding for Postgres 9.1.2?
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
On 05/30/12 10:17 AM, Khangelani Gama wrote: > So talking about compatibility, you are saying we can continue using > UTF-8?, but this will create more work for us because most of our > scripts assume that encoding is SQL_ASCII hence we want continue > using SQL_ASCII in Postgres 9.1.2. SQL_ASCII is not really an encoding, its saying "this data has no encoding at all, its just bytes". UTF-8 will reject any data thats not properly UTF8 encoded. converting from 'undefined' encoding to a rigorously enforced encoding is problematic. On the other hand, working in SQL_ASCII has all kinda ugly issues, like length(somestring) is just counting bytes, and not characters if the string happens to be a multibyte encoded entity. collation order is just binary. upper/lower don't work on anything other than USASCII (eg, accented characters are ignored). sounds to me like you're stuck in SQL_ASCII -- john r pierce N 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: