Re: Mis-interpreted extended character

Chris,

Thanks -- your answer is 90% of what I need!  As for the other 10%:

Chris wrote:

Our database ( (PostgreSQL) 7.3.5 ) uses Unicode encoding: 
[...]   

For some reason, If I try to use an extended character (ASCII code >
127) in a string, I get this peculiar result:   

[...]   

Probably your terminal is set to ISO-8859-1 ("latin 1") or something
like that, while your database is set to unicode as you showed.

Hence the mismatch. In unicode (for example UTF-8) non-US-ASCII
characters are encoded with two bytes (as opposed to one byte > 127 
as happens with ISO-8859-1). Solution is to have everything agree on the
encoding. Terminal + DB or Web Browser + DB.

Btw. you _do_ actually have an influence on what encoding a web browser
uses by setting the "encoding" HTTP header.

According to my experience, if you have to deal with only western
european encodings, you're better off (still) with ISO-8859-1 (or
ISO-8859-15 to have the EUR symbol too).


Short answer: not PostgreSQL's fault.

Agreed -- and thanks for the above info.

It ALSO turns out that Java has its own issues with >127 characters, which I'm going to look into -- but it was nice to prove you right (and solve half my problem!) by setting the web page encoding...

Bye, Chris.



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your     joining column's datatypes do not match

Thanks again,

        Andrew