Re: Multibyte encoding vs. SQL_ASCII vs. locales and European languages - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Frank Joerdens
Subject Re: Multibyte encoding vs. SQL_ASCII vs. locales and European languages
Date
Msg-id 20020129163139.A15511@superfly.archi-me-des.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Multibyte encoding vs. SQL_ASCII and European  (Frank Schafer <frank.schafer@setuza.cz>)
Responses Re: Multibyte encoding vs. SQL_ASCII vs. locales and European languages  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Multibyte encoding vs. SQL_ASCII vs. locales and European languages  (Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>)
List pgsql-general
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 01:41:16PM +0100, Frank Schafer wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-01-29 at 13:03, Frank Joerdens wrote:
> > Call me stupid - but I am trying to understand what multibyte encoding
> > (aka Latin1) ...
>
> !!!!!!???????????!!!...!!!!!!...???????????
>
> so Latin1 i MULTYBYTE ?????????!!!!!!!..!!!...?????????????
>
> Regards
> Frank ( too ;o)
              ^^
              and what is that emoticon?

??? What did you mean??? (did your mailer screw things up so I am only
seeing exclamation and question marks or did you try to tell me
something that way?).

By way of explaining myself a little better maybe: Looking at the
relevant section in the admin guide, which is entitled 'Localization',
you get the impression that either locale support or multibyte support
are good things to have if you are not in an English environment.
Multibyte support is mainly recommended for character sets that don't
fit into a single byte (Chinese, Japanese, Korean), and locale support
is said to be mostly sufficient for European languages . . . what escapes
me is why I should bother with either of these when SQL_ASCII works just
fine with my mostly German users. I must be missing something, right?

Regards, Frank

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Mourad EL HADJ MIMOUNE"
Date:
Subject: Re: unique & update
Next
From: Doug McNaught
Date:
Subject: Re: numeric SORT order