From: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
Cc: | t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, phd2(at)earthling(dot)net, "'Oleg Bartunov'" <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, "'hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Postgres 6.5 beta2 and beta3 problem |
Date: | 1999-06-17 00:53:21 |
Message-ID: | 199906170053.JAA08805@ext16.sra.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Second, the
> > default charset for char and varchar might be implemenation dependent,
> > not neccesarily limited to SQL_TEXT. The only requirement is the
> > charset must contain the repertoire SQL_TEXT has. I think any charsets
> > including ascii I've ever seen satisfies the requirement.
>
> Yow! I certainly misremembered the definition. Date and Darwen, 1997,
> point out that the SQL implementation *must* support at least one
> character set, SQL_TEXT, whose repertoire must contain:
>
> 1) Every character that is used in the SQL language itself (this is
> the part I remembered), and
>
> 2) Every character that is included in *any other character set*
> supported by the SQL implementation (Postgres).
>
> This second requirement is presumably to enable text handling of
> multiple character sets, but would seem to put severe restrictions on
> how we would implement things. Or can it act only as a placeholder,
> allowing us to define new character sets as different types in
> Postgres? Otherwise, we would have to retrofit capabilities into
> SQL_TEXT anytime we defined a new character set??
I don't think so. 2) can be read as:
Any other character set must contain every character included in
SQL_TEXT.
This seems extremely easy to implement. We could define SQL_TEXT be a
subset of ASCII and almost any character set contains ASCII chars. As
a result, any character set satisfies above that is logically same as
2). No?
> > Third, the
> > standards says nothing about locale.
>
> You are referring to the Unix-style system support for "locale"?
Yes.
> Certainly the NCHAR and character set support in SQL92 would qualify
> as locale support in the generic sense...
---
Tatsuo Ishii
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vadim Mikheev | 1999-06-17 01:49:50 | Re: Apparent bug in _make_subplan |
Previous Message | Henry B. Hotz | 1999-06-16 23:25:15 | Re: [HACKERS] Postgres mailing lists |