| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Yugo Nagata <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hash Functions |
| Date: | 2017-05-14 22:30:51 |
| Message-ID: | 396.1494801051@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> The express goal of the Unicode consortium is to replace all existing
> encodings with Unicode. My personal opinion is that a Unicode
> monoculture would be a good thing, provided reasonable differences can
> be accommodated.
Can't help remembering Randall Munroe's take on such things:
https://xkcd.com/927/
I agree that the Far Eastern systems that can't easily be replaced
by Unicode are that way mostly because they're a mess. But I'm
still of the opinion that locking ourselves into Unicode is a choice
we might regret, far down the road.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-05-14 22:38:52 | Re: PG10 pgindent run |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-05-14 22:29:00 | Re: Hash Functions |