| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32 |
| Date: | 2005-02-25 07:07:07 |
| Message-ID: | 200502250807.08569.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Oh, sorry. So there is no ordering in Unicode?
That statement is meaningless. Unicode is a character set, not a
collation order.
> No wonder some
> languages can't use Unicode effectively.
That has nothing to do with it.
> o Disallow encodings like UTF8 which PostgreSQL supports
> but the operating system does not (already disallowed by
> pginstaller)
I think the warning that initdb shouts out is already enough for this.
I don't think we want to disallow this for people who know what they
are doing.
> I assume C just compares the bytes, meaning equality comparisons are
> fine, but greater/less than is consistent but meaningless.
That statement is independent of whether you use Unicode or something
else.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-02-25 07:08:29 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-02-25 07:02:45 | Re: UTF8 or Unicode |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-02-25 07:08:29 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32 |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-02-25 03:22:16 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Repleacement for src/port/snprintf.c |