Re: SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings
Date: 2005-05-12 02:55:02
Message-ID: 4282C586.5000404@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I suppose that we can't change the semantics of SQL_ASCII without
> backwards compatibility problems. I wonder if introducing a new encoding
> that only allows 7-bit ascii, and making that the default, is the way to
> go.

A while back I requested a new encoding that is '7BITASCII'. It would
be excellent for those of use who require that the data is ascii, latin1
and utf8.

> This new encoding would be treated like any other normal encoding, i.e.
> setting client_encoding does transcoding (I expect that'd be a 1:1
> mapping in most or all cases) and rejects unmappable characters as soon
> as they're encountered.

Personally, I'd like UTF8 to be the default encoding :) This is the
21st century :D

Chris

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-05-12 03:34:56 Re: [HACKERS] plperl and pltcl installcheck targets
Previous Message Oliver Jowett 2005-05-12 02:42:36 SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings