I wrote:
> James Coleman <jtc...@gmail.com> writes:
>> I'm still interested in understanding why we're using the ISO locale
>> instead of the utf8 one in a utf8-labeled test though.
> We are not. My understanding of the rules about this is that the
> active LC_CTYPE setting determines the encoding that libc uses,
> period. The encoding suffix on the locale name only makes a
> difference when LC_CTYPE is being specified (or derived from LANG or
> LC_ALL), not any other LC_XXX setting --- although for consistency
> they'll let you include it in any LC_XXX value.
Oh wait --- I'm wrong about that. Looking at the code in pg_locale.c,
what actually happens is that we get data in the codeset implied by
the LC_TIME setting and then translate it to the database encoding
(cf commit 7ad1cd31b). So if bare "tr_TR" is taken as implying
iso-8859-9, which seems likely (it appears to work that way here,
anyway) then this test is exercising the codeset translation path.
We could change the test to say 'tr_TR.utf8' but that would give us
less test coverage.
regards, tom lane
