On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 05:54:05PM +0200, sulfinu@gmail.com wrote:
> Regarding the problem of "One True Encoding", the answer seems obvious tome:
> use only one encoding per database cluster, either UTF-8 or UTF-16 or another
> Unicode-aware scheme, whichever yields a statistically smaller database for
> the languages employed by the users in their data. This encoding should be a
> one time choice! De facto, this is already happening now, because one cannot
> change collation rules after a cluster has been created.

Umm, each database in a cluster can have a different encoding, so there
is no such thing as the "cluster's encoding". You can certainly argue
that it should be a one time choice, but I doubt you'll get people to
remove the possibilites we have now. If fact, if anything we'd probably
go the otherway, allow you to select the collation on a per
database/table/column level (SQL complaince requires this).

This has nothing to do with C by the way. C has many features that
allow you to work with different encodings. It just doesn't force you
to use any particular one.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
> -- John F Kennedy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHTZn+IB7bNG8LQkwRAvgTAKCSAhjKMwLS4/D+4hzfDIu708pIrgCfQ8OW
OvbgS/rjl2dJux31YX1pLxk=
=+3Q6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----