Re: WIP patch: Collation support
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP patch: Collation support |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 14708.1222092230@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP patch: Collation support (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP patch: Collation support
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes: > The first thing that we see is that the COLLATE keyword means different > things, so it's probably best to change that into: > CREATE DATABASE <name> WITH LC_COLLATE=<locale name> LC_CTYPE=<locale name> > in the stripped-down version. Then we need a way to map the > stripped-down syntax into the one in the original patch. That's just a > matter of looking up the collation in the pg_collation catalog with the > right LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE. It seems to me that in an installation using libc-based collation support, the collation names are likely to be the same as allowed values of LC_COLLATE anyway. So inventing different keywords doesn't really seem necessary. What might be sensible to ask is whether it is ever actually reasonable for LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE to have different settings. If we were willing to enforce that they be the same, we could reduce this to just the standard syntax COLLATE=something and be done with it. Not being much of a user of anything except C locale, I might be the wrong person to opine on this; but it seems to me that having them different is far more likely to be a mistake than desirable. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: