| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings |
| Date: | 2005-05-13 05:30:05 |
| Message-ID: | 42843B5D.6090606@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> We are currently seeing a whole lot of complaints due to the fact that
> 8.0 tends to default to Unicode encoding in environments where previous
> versions defaulted to SQL-ASCII. That says to me that a whole lot of
> people were getting along just fine in SQL-ASCII, and therefore that
> moving further away from that behavior is the wrong thing. In
> particular, there is not any single one of those complainants who would
> be happier with a 7-bit-only default; if they were using 7-bit-only
> data, they'd not have noticed a problem anyway.
I'm thinking of implementing a 7-bit-only encoding - any chance of
getting a quick checklist of what has to be done?
Thanks,
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2005-05-13 05:46:17 | Re: Best way to scan on-disk bitmaps |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-13 05:15:36 | Re: SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings |