X-Original-To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550174758C9
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:38:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8496F47580B
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:38:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2REcZub011336;
	Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:38:35 -0500 (EST)
To: Jodi Kanter <jkanter@virginia.edu>
Cc: Postgres SQL List <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: order by 
In-reply-to: <004a01c2f46c$61e15d80$de138f80@virginia.edu> 
References: <002701c2f3be$880749b0$de138f80@virginia.edu>
	<9613.1048748250@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<004a01c2f46c$61e15d80$de138f80@virginia.edu>
Comments: In-reply-to Jodi Kanter <jkanter@virginia.edu>
	message dated "Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:23:05 -0500"
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:38:35 -0500
Message-ID: <11335.1048775915@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-29.3 required=5.0
	tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,
	REPLY_WITH_QUOTES autolearn=ham	version=2.50
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp)
X-Archive-Number: 200303/616
X-Sequence-Number: 12654

Jodi Kanter <jkanter@virginia.edu> writes:
> When we originally initialized I set the LC_COLLATE=C. Was this not enough?

Should have been ... but see what pg_controldata says about the actual
setting.

			regards, tom lane