| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, - - <crossroads0000(at)googlemail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Unicode support |
| Date: | 2009-04-14 16:26:41 |
| Message-ID: | 12906.1239726401@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> What's really at issue is "what is a string?". That is, it a sequence
> of characters or a sequence of code points. If it's the former then we
> would also have to prohibit certain strings such as U&'\0301'
> entirely. And we have to make substr() pick out the right number of
> code points, etc.
Another question is "what is the purpose of a database"? To me it would
be quite the wrong thing for the DB to not store what is presented, as
long as it's considered legal. Normalization of legal variant forms
seems pretty questionable. So I'm with the camp that says this is the
application's responsibility.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-14 16:35:21 | Re: psql with "Function Type" in \df |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-14 16:17:45 | Re: proposal: add columns created and altered to pg_proc and pg_class |