Victor -  Based on what I am reading, I believe this also is compatible
with postgres UTF8 encoding since at least version 9.3.
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/multibyte.html
<https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/multibyte.html> (table shows bytes 1-4
per char)
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/multibyte.html#MULTIBYTE-CHARSET-SUPPORTED.
(current version is 14)

so, again. good idea.
thanks


On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 11:36 AM James Dailey <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 yes.
>
> This seems like a good idea, and I recommend we follow our standard lazy
> consensus on this..
>
> Having a standardized Unicode implementation will simplify and Utf8mb4
> instead of a mix of utf8* is a no-brainer...
>
>
> From
> https://www.eversql.com/mysql-utf8-vs-utf8mb4-whats-the-difference-between-utf8-and-utf8mb4/
>
>
> if you're using MySQL (or MariaDB or Percona Server) make sure you know
> your encodings. I would recommend anyone to set the MySQL encoding to
> utf8mb4. Never use utf8 in MySQL, there is no good reason to do that
> (unless you like tracing encoding related bugs).
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 8:14 AM VICTOR MANUEL ROMERO RODRIGUEZ <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Fineract Community,
>>
>> Before doing any change to JDBC Drivers or any artifact at Database layer
>> I think that is important to Standardize the Character Set and the
>> Collation.
>>
>> It is proposed to be used as Standard in Fineract: utf8mb4 as charset
>> and utf8mb4_unicode_ci as collation.
>>
>> For working on it and tracking this proposal I have raised this ticker
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1398
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Victor
>>
>

Reply via email to