2 Dec
2009
2 Dec
'09
6:01 p.m.
On Dec 2, 2009, at 9:49 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
This would probably be a performance win since it would reduce the amount of disk i/o.
(Note, it doesn't mean that 5 million characters could be stored since a UTF-8 character might be multi-byte.)
Currently the database can store invalid UTF-16 as well as valid UTF-16. Conversion from UTF-16 to UTF-8 might not be able to preserve invalid UTF-16 sequences. I don’t understand how the other platforms handle this. Perhaps the specification needs to be clearer on whether invalid UTF-16 is allowed. -- Darin