Thread

  1. Re: [HACKERS] Implications of multi-byte support in a distribution

    Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee> — 1999-09-02T06:52:27Z

    Thomas Lockhart wrote:
    > 
    > >     >> That shouldn't be too difficult, if we have an encoding
    > >     >> infomation with each text column or literal. Maybe now is the
    > >     >> time to introuce NCHAR?
    > >     TL> I've been waiting for a go-ahead from folks who would use
    > >     TL> it. imho the way to do it is to use Postgres' type system to
    > >     TL> implement it, rather than, for example, encoding "type"
    > >     TL> information into each string. We can also define a "default
    > >     TL> encoding" for each database as a new column in pg_database...
    > > What about sorting?  Would it be possible to solve it in similar way?
    > > If I'm not mistaken, there is currently no good way to use two different
    > > kinds of sorting for one postmaster instance?
    > 
    > Each encoding/character set can behave however you want. You can reuse
    > collation and sorting code from another character set, or define a
    > unique one.
    
    Is it really inside one postmaster instance ?
    
    If so, then is the character encoding defined at the create table /
    create index 
    process (maybe even separately for each field ?) or can I specify it
    when sort'ing ?
    
    -----------------
    Hannu