Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I notice in the documentation that the createdb --lc-ctype sets the >> lc_ctype setting for the database, but the corresponding parameter for >> CREATE DATABASE is CTYPE, but the global GUC setting is lc_ctype. >> Should that be more consistent? > > Hmm, I remember I pondered for a long time if it should be COLLATE and > CTYPE or LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE. I think the rationale in the end was > that a) COLLATE/CTYPE looks nicer and b) if we add support for ICU or > some other collation implementation, the association with LC_* > environment variables becomes misleading. > > Being consistent would be nice, though.
I think consistency could be reached by renaming the GUC setting to ctype. We could add a "lc_ctype" synonym for backwards compatibility (like sort_mem) -- or maybe not. Since the createdb setting is new as of 8.4, we should just rename that to ctype as well. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
