Re: Unicode upper() bug still present

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz
Cc: peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, hannu(at)tm(dot)ee, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unicode upper() bug still present
Date: 2003-10-21 09:07:13
Message-ID: 20031021.180713.74751617.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Why cannot do PostgreSQL as 100% pure Unicode system? We can do
> conversion from/to others encodings as client/server communication
> extension, but internaly in BE we can use only pure Unicode data. I
> think a lot of things will more simple...

Please don't do that. There's a known issue of round trip conversion
between Unicode and other encodings and still the existing encodings
are very important for many users.

Also I think DBMS should not rely on particular encoding
implementation.
--
Tatsuo Ishii

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2003-10-21 09:27:28 Re: Unicode upper() bug still present
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2003-10-21 08:44:54 Re: Unicode upper() bug still present