Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
As far as I understand, in MySQL unicode_ci (utf8_unicode_ci in particular) collations are meant to support all the characters regardless to locale.
I need to achieve the same with SQL Server 2008 R2. My database is going to contain data in very different languages (not limited to latin-based alphabets). I am not going to use non-Unicode strings at all. What collation should I chose?
You might as well go with Latin1_General_CI_AI
The reason is that unicode data is stored using NVarchar fields, SQL Server is more flexible in that it can mix Varchar (1-byte) and NVarchar (2-byte) data. So to match UTF8, any collation would do. As for CI – every single collation in 2008 allows for the CI specification to be added (it is a checkbox in the UI “case sensitive” – unchecked for insensitive).
The last bit and some others like width are just additional tuning on SQL Server.
Point #2 from http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?103,187048,188748
If you require sorting for a particular language, where languages handle accents differently, you need a specific dictionary order – refer here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms144250.aspx. Otherwise Latin1_General is based on Latin-US