From: | Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Iain <iain(at)mst(dot)co(dot)jp>, Christian Fowler <spider(at)viovio(dot)com>, pgsql-admin list <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: evil characters #bfef cause dump failure |
Date: | 2004-11-16 08:37:01 |
Message-ID: | 1100594222.3393.0.camel@fc3 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
В Пнд, 15/11/2004 в 20:34 -0500, Tom Lane пишет:
> "Iain" <iain(at)mst(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > It seems that this kind of thing pops up from time to time. I don't have v8
> > available right now to check, but is SQL_ASCII still the default DB
> > encoding? I'm wondering is unicode wouldn't be a better choice these days.
>
> IIRC you can select the default encoding at build time, so this is
> really a question for packagers not the development team.
>
> You make a good point though --- I'm a bit tempted to make it default to
> UNICODE for the Red Hat build, since Red Hat is pretty gung-ho on UTF8
> support these days.
>
> BTW, SQL_ASCII is not so much an encoding as the absence of any encoding
> choice; it just passes 8-bit data with no interpretation. So it's not
> *that* unreasonable a default. You can store UTF8 data in it without
> any problem, you just won't have the niceties like detection of bad
> character sequences.
This is, by the way, a reason why this encoding should be renamed to
SQL_8BIT (or something along these lines) and UNICODE to UTF-8.
--
Markus Bertheau <twanger(at)bluetwanger(dot)de>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Iain | 2004-11-16 08:45:09 | Re: evil characters #bfef cause dump failure |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-11-16 07:18:53 | Re: evil characters #bfef cause dump failure |