Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 422.982201977@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in MB database? (Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Shouldn't non-MULTIBYTE backend refuse to start in
MB database?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp> writes: >> Are these encodings all guaranteed to have the same collation order as >> SQL_ASCII? > Yes & no. Um, I'm confused ... >> If not, we have the same index corruption issues as for LOCALE. > If the backend is configued with LOCALE enabled and the database is > not configured with LOCALE, we will have a problem. But this will > happen with/without MUTIBYTE anyway. Mutibyte support does nothing > with LOCALE support. Can a backend configured with MULTIBYTE and running in non-SQL_ASCII encoding ever sort strings in non-character-code ordering, even if it is in C locale? I should think that such behavior is highly likely for multibyte character sets. If it can, then we mustn't allow a non-MULTIBYTE backend to run in such a database, I think. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: