Re: Impact of UNICODE encoding on performance

Marc, thanks for your input.

The more I think about it, the more it seems like Unicode is the right
answer.

In the meantime I have not seen anyone screaming out about performance
issues, so I am not going to worry about it any more.

Unicode also supports the Euro currency symbol, which helps a lot :-)

Kind regards

Harry

> With UNICODE UTF-8 the basic (a-z, A-Z, 0-9, ...) 128 characters
> (there are actually less than 128) are single byte characters
> identical to the original ASCII specification. All other characters
> might have multiple bytes.
>
> This means that as long you are transferring roman alphabet based
> text, the impact will be very low since the text will mostly consist
> of those 128 characters.
>
> for other languages more characters consisting of multiple bytes
> would be transferred.
>
> I don't know about PostgreSQL's internal treatement of multi-byte
> characters and whether this woud require more CPU time.
>
> After weighing pro and cons, I'd definitely go with UNICODE.
>
> Marc