Zdenek Kotala escribió: > The example is when you have translation data (vocabulary) in database. > But the reason is that ANSI specify (chapter 4.2) charset as a part of > string descriptor. See below: > > — The length or maximum length in characters of the character string type. > — The catalog name, schema name, and character set name of the character > set of the character string type. > — The catalog name, schema name, and collation name of the collation of > the character string type.
We already support multiple charsets, and are able to do conversions between them. The set of charsets is hardcoded and it's hard to make a case that a user needs to create new ones. I concur with Martijn's suggestion -- there's no need for this to appear in a system catalog. Perhaps it could be argued that we need to be able to specify the charset a given string is in -- currently all strings are in the server encoding (charset) which is fixed at initdb time. Making the system support multiple server encodings would be a major undertaking in itself and I'm not sure that there's a point. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
