Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters

On 03.12.21 21:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>> On 12/3/21 14:42, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Right, I envisioned that ASCII behaves the same but we'd use
>>> a numeric representation for high-bit-set values.  These
>>> cases could be told apart fairly easily by charin(), since
>>> the numeric representation would always be three digits.
> 
>> OK, this seems the most attractive. Can we also allow 2 hex digits?
> 
> I think we should pick one base and stick to it.  I don't mind
> hex if you have a preference for that.

I think we could consider char to be a single-byte bytea and use the 
escape format of bytea for char.  That way there is some precedent and 
we don't add yet another encoding or escape format.