Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong
Date: 2001-11-25 22:31:23
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0111252243340.609-100000@peter.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii writes:

> > I don't think so.  The sort order is independent of the character
> > encoding, and vice versa.  It must be, because
> This seems different from SQL's CREATE COLLATION syntax.
> >From SQL99's CREATE COLLATION definition:
>               CREATE COLLATION <collation name> FOR
>               <character set specification>
>                 FROM <existing collation name>
>                   [ <pad characteristic> ]
> So it seems a collation depends on a character set.

I see.  But that really doesn't have anything to do with reality.  In
fact, it completely undermines the transparency of the character set
encoding that we're probably trying to achieve.

Peter Eisentraut   peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-11-25 22:55:09
Subject: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-11-25 22:31:06
Subject: Re: Call for objections: deprecate postmaster -o switch?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group