Re: Rough draft for Unicode-aware UPPER()/LOWER()/INITCAP()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Marko Karppinen <marko(at)karppinen(dot)fi>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Rough draft for Unicode-aware UPPER()/LOWER()/INITCAP()
Date: 2004-05-19 15:26:11
Message-ID: 17173.1084980371@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Marko Karppinen <marko(at)karppinen(dot)fi> writes:
> I think this interaction between the locale and server_encoding is
> confusing. Is there any use case for running an incompatible mix?

In hindsight we should probably not have invented per-database encoding
selection, since it's so fragile to use in combination with cluster-wide
locale settings. However I believe that a lot of people in the Far East
are using multiple database encodings successfully, since they don't
much care about upper()/lower() etc ...

The long-term answer is to write our own locale support so we can
eliminate the cluster-wide-locale restriction. In the meantime I don't
want to remove flexibility that is useful to some people.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-05-19 16:10:54 Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2004-05-19 15:17:33 Re: Table Spaces