Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, 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, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Date: 2005-02-25 07:07:07
Message-ID: 200502250807.08569.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Oh, sorry. So there is no ordering in Unicode?

That statement is meaningless. Unicode is a character set, not a
collation order.

> No wonder some
> languages can't use Unicode effectively.

That has nothing to do with it.

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

I think the warning that initdb shouts out is already enough for this.
I don't think we want to disallow this for people who know what they
are doing.

> I assume C just compares the bytes, meaning equality comparisons are
> fine, but greater/less than is consistent but meaningless.

That statement is independent of whether you use Unicode or something
else.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 07:08:29 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 07:02:45 Re: UTF8 or Unicode

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 07:08:29 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-02-25 03:22:16 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Repleacement for src/port/snprintf.c