| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Boguk, Maksym" <maksymb(at)fast(dot)au(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: UTF8 national character data type support WIP patch and list of open issues. |
| Date: | 2013-09-19 18:46:56 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaT-h5C25LXd1DgfyiW2t9K92eVdVcJHC_1We0JpJFqgg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 6:42 PM, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> It seems to me that these two points here are the real core of your
>> proposal. The rest is just syntactic sugar.
>
> No, those are "desirable if possible" features. What's important is to
> declare in the manual that PostgreSQL officially supports national character
> types, as I stated below.
That may be what's important to you, but it's not what's important to
me. I am not keen to introduce support for nchar and nvarchar as
differently-named types with identical semantics. And I think it's an
even worse idea to introduce them now, making them work one way, and
then later change the behavior in a backward-incompatible fashion.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-09-19 18:57:53 | Re: [RFC] Extend namespace of valid guc names |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-09-19 18:39:43 | Re: [PERFORM] encouraging index-only scans |