Re: Unicode support

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, - - <crossroads0000(at)googlemail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Unicode support
Date: 2009-04-14 18:10:37
Message-ID: 15393.1239732637@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> I think there's a good case for some functions implementing the various
> Unicode normalization functions, though.

I have no objection to that so long as the code footprint is in line
with the utility gain (i.e. not all that much). If we have to bring in
ICU or something similar to make it happen, the cost/benefit ratio looks
pretty bad.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2009-04-14 18:13:26 Re: proposal: add columns created and altered topg_proc and pg_class
Previous Message Devrim GÜNDÜZ 2009-04-14 18:10:34 Re: Regression failure on RHEL 4 w/ PostgreSQL 8.4 beta1