Our column is currently collated to latin1_swedish_ci and special unicode characters are, obviously, getting stripped out. We want to be able to accept chars such as U+272A ✪, U+2764 ❤, (see this wikipedia article) etc. I'm leaning towards utf8_unicode_ci, would this collation handle these and other characters? I don't care about speed as this column isn't an index.
MySQL Version: 5.5.28-1
The collation is the least of your worries, what you need to think about is the character set for the column/table/database. The collation (rules governing how data is compared and sorted) is just a corollary of that.
MySQL supports several Unicode character sets, utf8 and utf8mb4 being the most interesting. utf8 supports Unicode characters in the BMP, i.e. a subset of all of Unicode. utf8mb4, available since MySQL 5.5.3, supports all of Unicode.
The collation to be used with any of the Unicode encodings is most likely xxx_general_ci or xxx_unicode_ci. The former is a general sorting and comparison algorithm independent of language, the latter is a more complete language independent algorithm supporting more Unicode features (e.g. treating "ß" and "ss" as equivalent), but is therefore also slower.
See https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/charset-unicode-sets.html.
Related
I am building an application using MySQL, where Chinese names need to be stored in the database. I'm trying to decide whether or not using the basic utf8 encoding (which only works with the Basic Multilingual Plane, and stores a maximum of 3 bytes per character in a UTF-8 encoding), or if I need to make use of the utf8mb4 encoding, which permits characters from higher planes to be encoded/stored.
Is the Unicode Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) sufficient to store all Chinese proper names?
MySQL's CHARACTER SET utf8 only handles 3-byte UTF-8 codes (BMP). Instead, use CHARACTER SET utf8mb4, which handles all 4-byte codes. Yes that includes all of currently defined Unicode for Chinese, Emoji, etc.
Use version 5.7, if practical.
TL;DR it doesn't matter, stick with utf8mb4 encoding, especially for new applications.
Long-form answer: the key difference between the two encodings is that utf8, long supported by MySQL, supports UTF8-encoded characters up to three bytes in length. As of 5.5.3, as noted by #rick-james, a new encoding, utf8mb4 relaxes this restriction, and otherwise has no disadvantages.
According to the MySQL documentation, the newer utf8mb4 encoding lifts this arbitrary three-character restriction, and there are few, if any disadvantages:
For a BMP character, utf8 and utf8mb4 have identical storage characteristics: same code values, same encoding, same length.
For a supplementary character, utf8 cannot store the character at all, whereas utf8mb4 requires four bytes to store it. Because utf8 cannot store the character at all, you have no supplementary characters in utf8 columns and need not worry about converting characters or losing data when upgrading utf8 data from older versions of MySQL.
Thus, my original question was misconceived: the maximum number of bytes to encode each character of a Chinese name shouldn't matter so long as the encoding you use actually supports encoding all Unicode code points.
I am creating an EER Model and want to find the collation that will provide me the most amount of characters to use. The characters that will be stored are generally standard English but on occasion the brands will have foreign and or accented characters. How can I ensure they are supported and not changed to squares or question marks down the road?
Generally I have them stored at UTF-16 but am not seeing that option available, in the default at least.
What you are looking for is the character set not the collation. The character set defines the set of symbols and encoding used to represent those symbols. The collation defines the rules used to compare the characters of a given character set and affect sorting.
Unicode character sets offer the broadest character support. MySQL supports two Unicode encodings:
UTF8 - uses up to 24 bits to encode a character, backwards compatible with ASCII encoding.
UCS2 - always uses 16 bits to encode each character, not compatible with ASCII encoding.
Within those two character sets MySQL has multiple collations that specify the sorting rules for different languages, Unicode rules, and binary comparison rules.
Look at: Character Set Support in MySQL Reference Manual.
Does anyone know why latin1_swedish is the default for MySQL. It would seem to me that UTF-8 would be more compatible right?
Defaults are usually chosen because they are the best universal choice, but in this case it does not seem thats what they did.
As far as I can see, latin1 was the default character set in pre-multibyte times and it looks like that's been continued, probably for reasons of downward compatibility (e.g. for older CREATE statements that didn't specify a collation).
From here:
What 4.0 Did
MySQL 4.0 (and earlier versions) only supported what amounted to a combined notion of the character set and collation with single-byte character encodings, which was specified at the server level. The default was latin1, which corresponds to a character set of latin1 and collation of latin1_swedish_ci in MySQL 4.1.
As to why Swedish, I can only guess that it's because MySQL AB is/was Swedish. I can't see any other reason for choosing this collation, it comes with some specific sorting quirks (ÄÖÜ come after Z I think), but they are nowhere near an international standard.
latin1 is the default character set. MySQL's latin1 is the same as the
Windows cp1252 character set. This means it is the same as the
official ISO 8859-1 or IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority)
latin1, except that IANA latin1 treats the code points between 0x80
and 0x9f as “undefined,” whereas cp1252, and therefore MySQL's latin1,
assign characters for those positions.
from
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/charset-we-sets.html
Might help you understand why.
Using a single-byte encoding has some advantages over multi-byte encondings, e.g. length of a string in bytes is equal to length of that string in characters. So if you use functions like SUBSTRING it is not intuitively clear if you mean characters or bytes. Also, for the same reasons, it requires quite a big change to the internal code to support multi-byte encodings.
Most strange features of this kind are historic. They did it like that long time ago, and now they can't change it without breaking some app depending on that behavior.
Perhaps UTF8 wasn't popular then. Or perhaps MySQL didn't support charsets where multiple bytes encode on character then.
To expand on why not utf8, and explain a gotcha not mentioned elsewhere in this thread be aware there is a gotcha with mysql utf8. It's not utf8! Mysql has been around for a long time, since before utf8 existed. As explained above this is likely why it is not the default (backwards comparability, and expectations of 3rd party software).
In the time when utf8 was new and not commonly used, it seems mysql devs added basic utf8 support, incorrectly using 3 bytes of storage. Now that it exists, they have chosen not to increase it to 4 bytes or remove it. Instead they added utf8mb4 "multi byte 4" which is real 4 byte utf8.
Its important that anyone migrating a mysql database to utf8 or building a new one knows to use utf8mb4. For more information see https://adamhooper.medium.com/in-mysql-never-use-utf8-use-utf8mb4-11761243e434
For a while now, I've used phpMyAdmin to manage my local MySQL databases. One thing I'm starting to pick up is the correct character sets for my database. I've decided UTF-8 is the best for compatibility (as my XHTML templates are served as UTF-8) but one thing that confuses me is the varied options for UTF-8 I'm presented with in the phpMyAdmin interface?
The two I've isolate are:
utf8_general_ci
utf8_unicode_ci
So my question is this: what is the difference between the general and unicode variants of utf8 in MySQL? (I've come to learn that ci is shorthand for case-insensitive)
Any help would be most grateful in this matter.
From the MySQL manual on Unicode Character Sets:
For any Unicode character set, operations performed using the _general_ci collation are faster than those for the _unicode_ci collation. For example, comparisons for the utf8_general_ci collation are faster, but slightly less correct, than comparisons for utf8_unicode_ci. The reason for this is that utf8_unicode_ci supports mappings such as expansions; that is, when one character compares as equal to combinations of other characters. For example, in German and some other languages “ß” is equal to “ss”. utf8_unicode_ci also supports contractions and ignorable characters. utf8_general_ci is a legacy collation that does not support expansions, contractions, or ignorable characters. It can make only one-to-one comparisons between characters.
See the referenced page for further information and examples.
The ##%!ing manual discusses this... :)
One of the issues is speed and accuracy of certain operations.
When I create a new MySQL database through phpMyAdmin, I have the option to choose the collation (e.g.-default, armscii8, ascii, ... and UTF-8). The one I know is UTF-8, since I always see this in HTML source code. But what is the default collation? What are the differences between these choices, and which one should I use?
Collation tells database how to perform string matching and sorting. It should match your charset.
If you use UTF-8, the collation should be utf8_general_ci. This will sort in unicode order (case-insensitive) and it works for most languages. It also preserves ASCII and Latin1 order.
The default collation is normally latin1.
Collation is not actually the default, it's giving you the default collation as the first choice.
What we're talking about is collation, or the character set that your database will use in its text types. Your default option is usually based on regional settings, so unless you're planning to globalize, that's usually peachy-keen.
Collations also determine case and accent sensitivity (i.e.-Is 'Big' == 'big'? With a CI, it is). Check out the MySQL list for all the options.
Short answer: always use utf8mb4 (specifically utf8mb4_unicode_ci) when dealing with collation in MySql & MariaDB.
Long answer:
MySQL’s utf8 encoding is awkwardly named, as it’s different from proper UTF-8 encoding. It doesn’t offer full Unicode support, which can lead to data loss or security vulnerabilities.
Luckily, MySQL 5.5.3 (released in early 2010) introduced a new encoding called utf8mb4 which maps to proper UTF-8 and thus fully supports Unicode.
Read the full text here: https://mathiasbynens.be/notes/mysql-utf8mb4
As to which specific utf8mb to choose, go with utf8mb4_unicode_ci so that sorting is always handled properly with minimal/unnoticeable performance drawbacks. See more details here: What's the difference between utf8_general_ci and utf8_unicode_ci