Re: support for DIN SPEC 91379 encoding

[Bzm@g]

U+ is not part of DIN SPEC 91379.

--
Boris


> Am 27.03.2022 um 19:47 schrieb Alvaro Herrera :
> 
> On 2022-Mar-27, Ralf Schuchardt wrote:
> 
>> where did you read, that this DIN SPEC 91379 norm is incompatible with UTF-8?
>> 
>> In the document „String.Latin+ 1.2: eine kommentierte und erweiterte
>> Fassung der DIN SPEC 91379. Inklusive einer umfangreichen Liste häufig
>> gestellter Fragen. Herausgegeben von der Fachgruppe String.Latin“
>> linked here https://www.xoev.de/downloads-2316#StringLatin it is said,
>> that the spec is a strict subset of unicode (E.1.6), and it is also
>> mentioned in E.1.4, that in UTF-8 all unicode characters can be
>> encoded. Therefore UTF-8 can be used to encode all DIN SPEC 91379
>> characters.
> 
> So the remaining question is whether DIN SPEC 91379 requires an
> implementation to support character U+.  If it does, then PostgreSQL
> is not conformant, because that character is the only one in Unicode
> that we don't support.  If U+ is not required, then PostgreSQL is
> okay.
> 
> -- 
> Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
> 
> 

Re: Would it be possible to add functions to tab-completion in psql?

[Bzm@g]

> As a dba I have to, very often, query system functions, starting with
> pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp and pg_current_wal_lsn.
> 
> Would it be possible/hard/expensive, to change tab-completion so that:
> 
> select pg_ would work?

Not what you asked for, but anyway, I use
\sf pg_ and copy the desired name to fix similar problems. 

>