On 2011-04-22, Geoffrey Myers <g...@serioustechnology.com> wrote: > Vick Khera wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Geoffrey Myers >> <li...@serioustechnology.com <mailto:li...@serioustechnology.com>> wrote: >> >> Here's our problem. We planned on moving databases a few at a time. >> Problem is, there is a process that pushes data from one database to >> another. If this process attempts to push data from a SQL_ASCII >> database to a new UTF8 database and it has one of these characters >> mentioned above, the process fails. >> >> >> The database's enforcement of the encoding should be the last layer that >> does so. Your applications should be enforcing strict utf-8 encoding >> from start to finish. Once this is done, and the old data already in >> the DB is properly encoded as utf-8, then there should be no problems >> switching on the utf-8 encoding in postgres to get that final layer of >> verification. > > Totally agree. Still, the question remains, why not leave it as SQL_ASCII?
perhaps you want sorted output in some locale other than 'C'? or maybe want to take a substring in the database... utf8 in SQL-ASCII is just a string of octets utf8 in a utf8 database is a string of unicode characters. -- ⚂⚃ 100% natural -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
