On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 12:57:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ah, you're right, I did misunderstand that.  However, it's still
> apparently the case that ICU works mostly with UTF16 and handles other
> encodings only via conversion to UTF16.  That's a pretty serious
> mismatch with our needs --- we'll end up converting to UTF16 all the
> time.  We're certainly not going to change to using UTF16 as the actual
> native string representation inside the backend, both because of the
> space penalty and incompatibility with tools like bison.

No need to do anything like that. We'd probably use the
u_strCompareIter() interface, where the two strings are defined as
iterators. We setup the iterator to understand whatever charset
postgres is currently running.

Many of the other function have iterator versions also, so you can
avoid UTF-16 entirely if you like.

Have a nice day,
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to 
> litigate.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to