Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> One very nifty trick would be to fix "char" to act as CHAR(), and map
>> CHAR(1) automatically to "char".
>
> Sorry, probably a stupid idea considering multi-byte encodings. I
> suppose it could be an optimization for single-byte encodings, but that
> seems very limiting.
No, there are lots of single-byte encoding databases. And one day we'll have
per-column encoding anyways and there are lots of databases that have columns
that want to be one-character ascii encoded fields.
It's limited but I wouldn't say it's very limiting. In the cases where it
doesn't apply there's no way out anyways. A UTF8 field will need a length
header in some form.
-- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
