Re: [suggestion]support UNICODE host variables in ECPG

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Matsumura, Ryo" <matsumura(dot)ryo(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "'jingwangian(at)gmail(dot)com'" <jingwangian(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com'" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [suggestion]support UNICODE host variables in ECPG
Date: 2018-12-21 17:07:36
Message-ID: 29222.1545412056@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> writes:
> Tsunakawa-san
>> * What's the benefit of supporting UTF16 in host variables?

> 1) As byte per character is constant in UTF16 encoding, it can process strings more efficiently than other encodings.

I don't think I buy that argument; it falls down as soon as you consider
characters above U+FFFF. I worry that by supporting UTF16, we'd basically
be encouraging users to write code that fails on such characters, which
doesn't seem like good project policy.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bossart, Nathan 2018-12-21 17:12:07 Re: A few new options for vacuumdb
Previous Message Tom Lane 2018-12-21 16:57:48 Re: Tid scan improvements