> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Why do you think that an UTF-8 encoded string starting with 0x92 is
> > valid?
> >
> > 0x92 can appear in the second, third or fourth octet, but should never
> > appear in the first octet.
> > --
> > Tatsuo Ishii
> > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> >
> >
> >> The following bug ha
> Then how then does Postgres expect to be able to store text that goes
> beyond SQL_ASCII.. ??? Because what you are saying in effect is that
If you need to store an arbitrary byte sequences, BYTEA is your
friend.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
---(end of broadcas
> Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > Why do you think that an UTF-8 encoded string starting with 0x92 is
> > valid?
> >
> > 0x92 can appear in the second, third or fourth octet, but should never
> > appear in the first octet.
> > --
> > Tatsuo Ishii
> > SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> >
> >
> >> The following bug ha
"Fil Matthews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In Short A Postgres UTF8 database .. PGCLIENENCODING=UTF8
...
> Insert into test values ( chr(146));;
Can you explain what you expected to happen here? Did you, for example, expect
the character with Unicode code point 146 to be inserted? Because the
Fil Matthews wrote:
> Come on are you serious?? .. Just how does one work with completly valid
> data that has an ascii 128 + value ??
A string with a single byte that has high-bit set (characters 128-255)
is *not* a valid UTF-8 sequence. That's why you get the error. One could
argue that chr(14
Why do you think that an UTF-8 encoded string starting with 0x92 is
valid?
0x92 can appear in the second, third or fourth octet, but should never
appear in the first octet.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 3638
> Logged by:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 3638
Logged by: Fil Matthews
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8-1, 8-2
Operating system: Linux Debian - Windows XP
Description:UTF8 Character encoding does NOT work
Details:
Judging f
