Re: Unicode Normalization - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From pg@thetdh.com
Subject Re: Unicode Normalization
Date
Msg-id W979322959270161253798647@webmail34
Whole thread Raw
In response to Unicode Normalization  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
In a context using normalization, wouldn't you typically want to store a normalized-text type that could perhaps
(dependingon locale) take advantage of simpler, more-efficient comparison functions?  Whether you're doing
INSERT/UPDATE,or importing a flat text file, if you canonicalize characters and substrings of identical meaning when
trivialdistinctions of encoding are irrelevant, you're better off later.  User-invocable normalization functions by
themselvesdon't make much sense.  (If Postgres now supports binary- or mixed-binary-and-text flat files, perhaps for
restorepurposes, the same thing applies.)<br /><br />David Hudson<br /><br /> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Sam Mason
Date:
Subject: libpq port number handling
Next
From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Date:
Subject: plpgsql function is so slow