Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong
Date
Msg-id 15306.1006184718@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> I don't have a set theory text available, but I think this should give a
> fair indication that the number of bits in the value of S is the sum of
> the bits in each individual character (which is in turn vaguely defined
> elsewhere in SQL99) -- at least in Euclidean memory architectures.

But "how many bits in a character?" is exactly the question at this
point.  To be fair, I don't think our notion of on-the-fly encoding
translation is envisioned anywhere in the SQL spec, so perhaps we
shouldn't expect it to tell us which encoding to count the bits in.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: postgresql.conf
Next
From: F Harvell
Date:
Subject: Re: bug or change in functionality in 7.2?