| From: | Culley Harrelson <culley(at)fastmail(dot)fm> |
|---|---|
| To: | johnsw(at)wardbrook(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Unicode vs SQL_ASCII DBs |
| Date: | 2004-02-01 00:51:03 |
| Message-ID: | B62E7A65-5450-11D8-AA03-000A9591EB8C@fastmail.fm |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Jan 31, 2004, at 7:32 AM, John Sidney-Woollett wrote:
>
> 4) I'm not initially expecting arabic, chinese, cyrillic or other
> language
> types to be stored in the database. But if they were, would UNICODE be
> the
> best encoding scheme to use for future proofing the data?
>
If there is a remote chance that you might ever need CJK support you
should start now with unicode encoding. Switching the encoding of your
database is a major, major pain. I have a SQL_ASCII database that I
wish were UNICODE but the conversion is such an ugly undertaking that I
haven't even tried.
culley
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-01 01:53:42 | Re: Problem with function |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-01 00:18:01 | Re: Problem with API (libpq) - detailed error codes |