Re: Converting MySQL tinyint to PostgreSQL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Joe <svn(at)freedomcircle(dot)net>, Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Converting MySQL tinyint to PostgreSQL
Date: 2005-07-12 22:31:20
Message-ID: 713.1121207480@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> I don't see how UCS-16 could always use only 2 bytes.

Simple: it fails to handle Unicode code points above 0x10000. (We only
recently fixed a similar limitation in our UTF8 support, by the by, but
it *is* fixed and I doubt we want to backpedal.)

The problem with embedded null bytes is quite serious though, and I
doubt that we'll ever see the backend natively handling encodings that
require that. It's just not worth the effort. Certainly the idea of
not having to store a length word for CHAR(1) fields is not going to
inspire anyone to invest the effort involved ;-)

Keep in mind also that any such change would involve putting slower and
more complicated logic into some routines that are hotspots already;
so even if you did all the work involved, you might find the patch
rejected on the grounds that it's a net performance loss. Most of the
developers have plenty of tasks to do with a larger and more certain
reward than this.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Smith 2005-07-12 22:40:15 postgresql SSL off
Previous Message Joe 2005-07-12 22:27:47 Re: Converting MySQL tinyint to PostgreSQL