Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Date: 2005-01-01 16:36:46
Message-ID: 200501011636.j01Gakj12690@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32


TODO updated:

o Disallow encodings like UTF8 which PostgreSQL supports
but the operating system does not (already disallowed by
pginstaller)

To fix UTF8, the data needs to be converted to UTF16 and then
the Win32 strcoll() can be used.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> UNICODE/UTF-8 does not work on the win32 server. The reason is that
> strcoll() and friends don't work with it. To support it on win32, it
> needs to be converted to UTF16 and use the wide-character versions of
> the fucntion. Which we do not do.
> (See
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers-win32/2004-11/msg00036.php
> and
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers-win32/2004-12/msg00106.php)
>
>
> I don't *think* we need to disable ito n the client. AFAIK, the client
> interfaces don't use any of these functions, and I've seen reports of
> people using that long before we had a native win32 server.
>
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Tatsuo Ishii [mailto:t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp]
> >Sent: den 1 januari 2005 01:10
> >To: tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us
> >Cc: Magnus Hagander; pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org
> >Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
> >
> >
> >Sorry, but I don't subscribe to pgsql-hackers-win32 list. What's the
> >problem here?
> >--
> >Tatsuo Ishii
> >
> >> "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> >> > We know it's broken and won't be fixed for 8.0.
> >>
> >> > If we just #ifndef WIN32 the definitions in
> >utils/mb/encnames.c it won't
> >> > be possible to select that encoding, right? Will that have
> >any other
> >> > unwanted effects (such as breaking client encodings)? If
> >not, I suggest
> >> > this is done.
> >>
> >> I believe the subscripts in those arrays have to match the encoding
> >> enum type, so you can't just ifdef out individual entries.
> >>
> >> > (Or perhaps something can be done in pg_valid_server_encoding?)
> >>
> >> Making the valid_server_encoding function reject it might work.
> >> Tatsuo-san would know for sure.
> >>
> >> Should we also reject it as a client encoding, or does that work OK?
> >>
> >> regards, tom lane
> >>
> >
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-01-01 17:01:54 Re: [HACKERS] Bgwriter behavior
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2005-01-01 15:44:09 Re: 'COPY ... FROM' inserts to btree, blocks on buffer

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2005-01-01 17:14:45 Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2005-01-01 13:48:04 Re: UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32