Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? Uh, was it? I don't recall that. Do we have any numbers on the performance overhead? regards, tom lane See below. Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Unicode combining characters From: Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2001 23:05:16 -0400 Comments: In-reply-to Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] message dated Thu, 04 Oct 2001 11:16:42 +0900 Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: To accomplish this, I moved MatchText etc. to a separate file and now like.c includes it *twice* (similar technique used in regexec()). This makes like.o a little bit larger, but I believe this is worth for the optimization. That sounds great. What's your feeling now about the original question: whether to enable multibyte by default now, or not? I'm still thinking that Peter's counsel is the wisest: plan to do it in 7.3, not today. But this fix seems to eliminate the only hard reason we have not to do it today ... regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? Uh, was it? I don't recall that. Do we have any numbers on the performance overhead? See below. Oh, okay, now I recall that thread. You're right, we did agree. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 03:20, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? Is there currently some agreed plan for introducing standard NCHAR/NVARCHAR types. What does ISO/ANSI say about multybyteness of simple CHAR types ? -- Hannu ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
On Tue, 2002-04-16 at 03:20, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? Is there currently some agreed plan for introducing standard NCHAR/NVARCHAR types. I have such a kind of *personal* plan, maybe for 7.4, not for 7.3 due to the limitation of my free time. BTW, NCHAR/NVARCHAR is just a abbreviation of CHAR(n) CHARACTER SET foo(where foo is an implementaion defined charset). So I'm not too impressed by an idea implementing NCHAR/NVARCHAR alone. What does ISO/ANSI say about multybyteness of simple CHAR types ? There's no such that idea multybyteness in the standard. In my understanding the standard does not restrict normal CHAR types to have only ASCII (more precisely SQL_CHARACTER). Moreover, CHAR types without CHARSET specification will a have default charset to SQL_TEXT, and its actual charset will be defined by the implementation. In summary allowing any characters including multibyte ones in CHAR types is not againt the standard at all, IMO. -- Tatsuo Ishii ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
[HACKERS] multibyte support by default
In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? -- Tatsuo Ishii ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by
default for 7.3. Any objection?
It was my understanding (or if I was mistaken, then it is my suggestion)
that the build-time option would be removed altogether and certain
performance-critical places (if any) would be wrapped into
if (encoding_is_single_byte(current_encoding)) { }
That's basically what I did with the locale support.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
Re: [HACKERS] multibyte support by default
Tatsuo Ishii [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In my understanding, our consensus was enabling multibyte support by default for 7.3. Any objection? Uh, was it? I don't recall that. Do we have any numbers on the performance overhead? regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
