Subject | Re: Converting of an ISO8859_1 database to UTF8 |
---|---|
Author | patrick_marten |
Post date | 2012-11-05T08:11:24Z |
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Martijn Tonies" <m.tonies@...> wrote:
thanks for your reply.
>Hi Martijn,
> Hi,
>
thanks for your reply.
> > 3.3 Doing everything manuallyWhat do you mean by this? My new application is written in Delphi XE, which supports unicode. Wouldn't reading work with an connection, which has ISO8859_1 as character set? Maybe I could even access the fields as AnsiString if needed. The writing would happen over the UTF8 connection.
> > Means probably the most work, but appears to be the safest way at the
> > moment.
> > 3.3.1 I could start with the final UTF8 database, i.e. with all the
> > structure changes etc. included
> > 3.3.2 The source database would be accessed by a connection with ISO8859_1
> > as character set, the UTF8 one by a connection with UTF8 as character set
>
> This would work if the application is able to read ISO8859_1 and write UTF8,
> I think the DataPumpI need to do the upgrade at customers machnies, so I fear Database Workbench can't help me here.
> in Database Workbench should be able to do that for you.
>
> Use USO8859_1, no Unicode client, for the source, and UTF8, Unicode clientHm, same as above... I hoped to do it with one client (if it shall be the point "3.3 Doing everything manually" from my first post).. How else can I get the data from the ISO8859_1 client to the UTF8 one?
> for the destination.
> > Regarding 3.1.4 and 3.2.4: I've found this example on how to change theYes, didn't look that "healthy" to me too, but has worked and that's what IBExpert (I believe) has made of my attempt to change the sub type manually.
> > blob type:
> > UPDATE RDB$FIELDS SET RDB$FIELD_SUB_TYPE = 0
> > WHERE RDB$FIELD_NAME=(SELECT RDB$FIELD_SOURCE FROM RDB$RELATION_FIELDS
> > WHERE RDB$FIELD_NAME='SOME_TEXT_BLOB_FIELD' AND
> > RDB$RELATION_NAME='SOME_TABLE');
> > Seems to work without the content getting lost. Sure, it's in the wrong
> > format that way, but it seems to be possible to obtaint the content and
> > then to save it in the new format. But depending on the choice of the way
> > to go, this could be irrelevant.
>
> You are modifying the blob to BINARY, that doesn't sound right.
>