On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 6:42 PM, MauMau <maumau307@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It seems to me that these two points here are the real core of your
>> proposal. The rest is just syntactic sugar.
>
> No, those are "desirable if possible" features. What's important is to
> declare in the manual that PostgreSQL officially supports national character
> types, as I stated below.
That may be what's important to you, but it's not what's important to
me. I am not keen to introduce support for nchar and nvarchar as
differently-named types with identical semantics. And I think it's an
even worse idea to introduce them now, making them work one way, and
then later change the behavior in a backward-incompatible fashion.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company