utf-8 support in libc?

Vivek Khera vivek at khera.org
Mon Mar 20 17:21:09 UTC 2006

On Mar 20, 2006, at 12:16 PM, [LoN]Kamikaze wrote:

> If you make sure that your data goes into the database in a binary  
> safe
> form (look for escape methods supplied by your favourite programming
> language) it doesn't matter how the database is encoded, because you
> will always get the data back the way you put it in.

I expect that to happen.  What I'm more curious about is the  
collating speed.  Ie, how fast are the sorting and string comparison  
functions.   The clam here is that in *BSD these are somehow not  
fast.  I'm not sure if that is a BSD issue or a Postgres issue for  
not taking advantage of the BSD functions properly.

> Vivek Khera wrote:
>> Reading thru one of the postgres mailing lists regarding which  
>> character
>> encoding to use for a database, someone chimed in and claimed this:
>>  Umm, you should choose an encoding supported by your platform and  
>> the
>>  locales you use. For example, UTF-8 is a bad choice on *BSD because
>>  there is no collation support for UTF-8 on those platforms. On
>>  Linux/Glibc UTF-8 is well supported but you need to make sure the
>>  locale you initdb with is a UTF-8 locale. By and large postgres
>>  correctly autodetects the encoding from the locale.
>> Is this an accurate claim for FreeBSD?  I need to have a UTF-8  
>> encoded
>> database in an upcoming project, and performance is always a concern.
>> Thanks.
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable- 
>> unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

More information about the freebsd-stable mailing list