MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 21:15:30 +0100
From: Phil Krylov <phil@krylov.eu>
To: Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Pre-proposal: unicode normalized text
In-Reply-To: <02d05bc98ca5b2d8ab38fec5fe5b7625@anastigmatix.net>
References: <f30b58657ceb71d5be032decf4058d454cc1df74.camel@j-davis.com>
 <ZR2fnTPDwPb0IamC@ubby21>
 <CA+TgmoY6vNbDoBugDT=3rdJ-diyLw-kQ9sxB2JXenv48xV_tVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <43864caecd65d02081d623d05ccc1683@anastigmatix.net>
 <a415e27830b8c94cea1b1c4bd60d254f0f397866.camel@j-davis.com>
 <02d05bc98ca5b2d8ab38fec5fe5b7625@anastigmatix.net>
Message-ID: <b5ad7935d2c0d53a361b2fe0efc8b0c6@krylov.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b5ad7935d2c0d53a361b2fe0efc8b0c6%40krylov.eu>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-10-04 23:32, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Well, for what reason does anybody run PG now with the encoding set
> to anything besides UTF-8? I don't really have my finger on that pulse.
> Could it be that it bloats common strings in their local script, and
> with enough of those to store, it could matter to use the local
> encoding that stores them more economically?

I do use CP1251 for storing some data which is coming in as XMLs in 
CP1251, and thus definitely fits. In UTF-8, that data would take exactly 
2x the size on disks (before compression, and pglz/lz4 won't help much 
with that).

-- Ph.