Re: invalidly encoded strings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: invalidly encoded strings
Date
Msg-id 12726.1189441262@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: invalidly encoded strings  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: invalidly encoded strings
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> BTW, I'm sure this was discussed but I forgot the conclusion: should
>> chr(0) throw an error?

> I think it should, yes.

OK.  Looking back, there was also some mention of changing chr's
argument to bigint, but I'd counsel against doing that.  We should not
need it since we only support 4-byte UTF8, hence code points only up to
21 bits (and indeed even 6-byte UTF8 can only have 31-bit code points,
no?).

If Tatsuo can find official code-point mappings for any other MB
encodings, +1 on supporting those too.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Teodor Sigaev
Date:
Subject: Re: integrated tsearch doesn't work with non utf8 database
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: integrated tsearch doesn't work with non utf8 database