Re: Impact of UNICODE encoding on performance

Thanks for the feedback Aarni!

It's good to know that you are happy with LATIN-1. That is my fallback at
the moment.

I just wonder how much of performance price there is to pay for going with
UNICODE.

I guess I might just have to suck it and see!

Kind regards

Harry

> Hi Harry,
>
> Dunno about the performance penalty, but so far I am happy with LATIN1 dbase
> system (RH and Trustix). Even with cyrillic characters. Then again, I work
> with browser interfaces and it's not really up to me what encoding the client
> has or has not installed. <if western, charset=iso-iso-8859-1, if fellow
> russki harasoo charset=windows-1251> is, I guess, a good bet. It's a windows
> world, so far.
>
> Soviet KOI-X X, KOI8-r, KOI8-RU, Mac Cyrillic (Standard), CyrWin Cyrillic and
> the rest of the soup ...
>
> Some experience and my half a pea.
>
> BR,
>
> Aarni
>
>
> On Tuesday 16 March 2004 12:43, you wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> I am just setting out on a new project, having recently switched to
>> PostgreSQL.
>>
>> My immediate requirements would be satisfied with ISO-8859-1 (LATIN-1)
>> encoding, but it is conceivable that, if things go really well, somewhere
>> in the future my character encoding requirements will broaden.
>>
>> So I am tempted to specify UNICODE form the outset, and be done with it.
>>
>> But I cannot help wondering how much of a performance penalty this entails.
>>
>> If the performance hit is not significant, I shall be happy to stick with
>> UNICODE.
>>
>> But if anyone has any strong views (or experience) on this issue I shall be
>> very grateful for some feedback.
>>
>> Many thanks.
>>
>> Harry Mantheakis
>> London, UK
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings