Sorry, "static text" is not right. What I meant was that if you need to perform more
complicated comparisons on the text (substring matches, as in a LIKE SQL statement),
the overhead involved in UTF-8 can be significant (20 or 30% slower than with UCS-2).
If it is a simple "yes or no" match on the text, it is not so bad. And of course, UTF-8
sure beats ISO 2022.
> On 96.06.14 17:49, Steve Billings <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Actually, most of the big databases (Oracle, etc.) now support UTF-8
>> encoding. This is OK for storing static text, but if you are doing
>> anything complicated, the performace can be poor.
>Interesting... can you be a little more specific about what
>can cause performance problems? I'm not sure what text stored
>in a database would not be static text.
>Also, do you know if anyone has quantified the impact on
> Steve Billings
> Product Internationalization
> Workgroup Technology Corp. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
> 81 Hartwell Avenue Phone: (617) 674-7615
> Lexington, MA 02173 USA Fax: (617) 674-0034
Control Data Asia/Pacific Region E-mail: J.Morrison@twntpe.cdc.com
6/F, 131 Nanking East Road, Section 3 Voice: 886-2-715-2222 x217
Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C Fax: 886-2-712-9197
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:31 EDT