Many Thanks for feedback.
-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 7:54 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] What's a correct or good Encoding for Postgres
9.1.2?
On 05/30/12 10:17 AM, Khangelani Gama wrote:
> So talking about compatibility, you are saying we can continue using
> UTF-8?, but this will create more work for us because most of our
> scripts assume that encoding is SQL_ASCII hence we want continue
> using SQL_ASCII in Postgres 9.1.2.
SQL_ASCII is not really an encoding, its saying "this data has no
encoding at all, its just bytes". UTF-8 will reject any data thats not
properly UTF8 encoded.
converting from 'undefined' encoding to a rigorously enforced encoding is
problematic. On the other hand, working in SQL_ASCII has all kinda ugly
issues, like length(somestring) is just counting bytes, and not characters
if the string happens to be a multibyte encoded entity.
collation order is just binary. upper/lower don't work on anything
other than USASCII (eg, accented characters are ignored).
sounds to me like you're stuck in SQL_ASCII
--
john r pierce N 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make
changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The contents of and attachments to this e-mail are intended for the addressee only, and may contain the confidential
informationof Argility (Proprietary) Limited and/or its subsidiaries. Any review, use or dissemination thereof by
anyoneother than the intended addressee is prohibited.
If you are not the intended addressee please notify the writer immediately and destroy the e-mail. Argility
(Proprietary)Limited and its subsidiaries distance themselves from and accept no liability for unauthorised use of
theire-mail facilities or e-mails sent other than strictly for business purposes.
