Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong
Date: 2001-11-25 22:31:23
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0111252243340.609-100000@peter.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii writes:

> > I don't think so.  The sort order is independent of the character
> > encoding, and vice versa.  It must be, because
>
> This seems different from SQL's CREATE COLLATION syntax.
> >From SQL99's CREATE COLLATION definition:
>
>               CREATE COLLATION <collation name> FOR
>               <character set specification>
>                 FROM <existing collation name>
>                   [ <pad characteristic> ]
>
> So it seems a collation depends on a character set.

I see.  But that really doesn't have anything to do with reality.  In
fact, it completely undermines the transparency of the character set
encoding that we're probably trying to achieve.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-11-25 22:55:09
Subject: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-11-25 22:31:06
Subject: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group