| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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 |