Re: UTF8 or Unicode

From: Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk, oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com, List pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: UTF8 or Unicode
Date: 2005-02-25 08:59:25
Message-ID: 1109321965.6016.32.camel@petra
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 23:51 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > I do not object the changing UNICODE->UTF-8, but all these discussions
> > sound a little bit funny to me.
> >
> > If you want to blame UNICODE, you should blame LATIN1 etc. as
> > well. LATIN1(ISO-8859-1) is actually a character set name, not an
> > encoding name. ISO-8859-1 can be encoded in 8-bit single byte
> > stream. But it can be encoded in 7-bit too. So when we refer to
> > LATIN1(ISO-8859-1), it's not clear if it's encoded in 7/8-bit.
>
> Wow, Tatsuo has a point here. Looking at encnames.c, I see:
>
> "UNICODE", PG_UTF8
>
> but also:
>
> "WIN", PG_WIN1251
> "LATIN1", PG_LATIN1

> so I see what he is saying. We are not consistent in favoring the
> official names vs. the common names.

Yes. I said already. For example "WIN" is extremely bad alias. It all is
heritage from old versions.

> I will work on a patch that people can review and test.

Thanks.

Karel

--
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 10:01:44 Re: UTF8 or Unicode
Previous Message Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD 2005-02-25 08:57:15 Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] win32 performance - fsync question

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 10:01:44 Re: UTF8 or Unicode
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2005-02-25 07:02:45 Re: UTF8 or Unicode