> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 11:58:58AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> writes: >> > In "8.13.2. Encoding Handling" >> > <para> >> > When using binary mode to pass query parameters to the server >> > and query results back to the client, no character set conversion >> > is performed, so the situation is different. In this case, an >> > encoding declaration in the XML data will be observed, and if it >> > is absent, the data will be assumed to be in UTF-8 (as required by >> > the XML standard; note that PostgreSQL does not support UTF-16). >> > On output, data will have an encoding declaration >> > specifying the client encoding, unless the client encoding is >> > UTF-8, in which case it will be omitted. >> > </para> >> >> > In the first sentence shouldn't "no character set conversion" be "no >> > encoding conversion"? PostgreSQL is doing client/server encoding >> > conversion, rather than character set conversion. >> >> I think the text is treating "character set conversion" as meaning >> the same thing as "encoding conversion"; certainly I've never seen >> any place in our docs that draws a distinction between those terms. >> If you think there is a difference, maybe we need to define those >> terms somewhere. > > Uh, I think Unicode is a character set, and UTF8 is an encoding. I > think Tatsuo is right here.
Yes, a character set is different from an encoding. I though it's a common understanding among people. Best regards, -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
