Re: [ADMIN] Mis-interpreted extended character

[Andrew Biagioni]

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