> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yes, what I know almost all use utf8 without problems. Long time I > > didn't see any request for multi encoding support. > > Well, not *everything* can be represented as UTF-8; I think this is > particularly an issue with Asian languages. > > If we chose to do it, I think that per-column encoding support would end up > looking a lot like per-column collation support: it would be yet another per- > column property along with typoid, typmod, and typcollation. I'm not entirely > sure it's worth it, although FWIW I do believe Oracle has something like this.
Yes, the idea is that users will be able to declare columns of type NCHAR or NVARCHAR which will use the pre-determined encoding type. If we say that NCHAR is UTF-8 then the NCHAR column will be of UTF-8 encoding irrespective of the database encoding. It will be up to us to restrict what Unicode encodings we want to support for NCHAR/NVARCHAR columns. This is based on my interpretation of the SQL standard. As you allude to above, Oracle has a similar behaviour (they support UTF-16 as well). Support for UTF-16 will be difficult without linking with some external libraries such as ICU. > At any rate, it seems like quite a lot of work. Thanks for putting my mind at ease ;-) Rgds, Arul Shaji > > Another idea would be to do something like what we do for range types > - i.e. allow a user to declare a type that is a differently-encoded version of > some base type. But even that seems pretty hard. > > -- > Robert Haas > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers