Hi Laurenz, Tom, Peter, Thanks for your suggestions. The practical solution seems to be to override comparison operators of char, varchar and text data types with UDFs that behave as Tom mentioned.
From: Peter Geoghegan [mailto:p...@bowt.ie] > That said, the idea of an "EBCDIC collation" seems limiting. Why > should a system like DB2 for the mainframe (that happens to use EBCDIC > as its encoding) not have a more natural, human-orientated collation > even while using EBCDIC? ISTM that the point of using the "C" locale > (with EBDIC or with UTF-8 or with any other encoding) is to get a > performance benefit where the actual collation's behavior doesn't > matter much to users. Are you sure it's really important to be > *exactly* compatible with EBCDIC order? As long as you're paying for a > custom collation, why not just use a collation that is helpful to > humans? You are right. I'd like to ask the customer whether and why they need EBCDIC ordering. Regards Takayuki Tsunakawa
