| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Encoding and i18n |
| Date: | 2007-10-08 10:41:41 |
| Message-ID: | 200710081241.42433.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Am Samstag, 6. Oktober 2007 schrieb Tom Lane:
> It's not real clear to me whether, on a Unix machine, there is even
> supposed to be any difference between setting LC_TIME=es_ES.iso88591 and
> setting it to es_ES.utf8. Since nl_langinfo(CODESET) is supposedly
> determined only by LC_CTYPE, you could argue that strftime's results
> should be in that encoding regardless, and that the codeset component of
> other LC_ variables should be ignored. Some experimentation suggests
> that at least in glibc it doesn't work that way, and that there is in
> fact no principled way for you to find out what encoding strftime is
> giving you :-(.
It might be useful to research whether that behavior is following the spec
(POSIX or whatever).
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-10-08 10:53:38 | Re: proposal casting from XML[] to int[], numeric[], text[] |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-10-08 10:41:07 | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |