Re: multibyte support by default

> > In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by
> > default for 7.3. Any objection?
> 
> Uh, was it?  I don't recall that.  Do we have any numbers on the
> performance overhead?
> 
>             regards, tom lane

See below.

Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Unicode combining characters 
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>
cc: ZeugswetterA@spardat.at, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, phede-ml@islande.org,       pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 23:05:16 -0400
Comments: In-reply-to Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>    message dated "Thu, 04 Oct 2001 11:16:42 +0900"

Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp> writes:
> To accomplish this, I moved MatchText etc. to a separate file and now
> like.c includes it *twice* (similar technique used in regexec()). This
> makes like.o a little bit larger, but I believe this is worth for the
> optimization.

That sounds great.

What's your feeling now about the original question: whether to enable
multibyte by default now, or not?  I'm still thinking that Peter's
counsel is the wisest: plan to do it in 7.3, not today.  But this fix
seems to eliminate the only hard reason we have not to do it today ...
        regards, tom lane