| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: UTF8 or Unicode |
| Date: | 2005-02-25 16:32:21 |
| Message-ID: | 200502251732.22414.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Am Freitag, 25. Februar 2005 16:26 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> OK, but what about latin1?
The following character set names are specified in the SQL standard and
therefore somewhat non-negotiable:
SQL_CHARACTER
GRAPHIC_IRV
LATIN1
ISO8BIT
UTF16
UTF8
UCS2
SQL_TEXT
SQL_IDENTIFIER
So we have to use LATIN1, even though it creates an inconsistency. We
discussed this a while ago during the last great renaming, I think.
Btw., I think ISO8BIT is the correct name for what we call SQL_ASCII, but I
haven't analyzed that in detail, yet.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-02-25 16:32:38 | Re: [HACKERS] Development Plans |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2005-02-25 16:24:50 | Re: [HACKERS] Development Plans |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-02-25 18:36:57 | Re: UTF8 or Unicode |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-02-25 15:58:33 | Re: bcc32.mak for libpq broken? (distro 8.0.0) (fwd) |