On 9/20/13 2:22 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> I am not keen to introduce support for nchar and nvarchar as
>>> >> differently-named types with identical semantics.
>> >
>> > Similar examples already exist:
>> >
>> > - varchar and text: the only difference is the existence of explicit length
>> > limit
>> > - numeric and decimal
>> > - int and int4, smallint and int2, bigint and int8
>> > - real/double precison and float
> I agree that the fact we have both varchar and text feels like a wart.
> The other examples mostly involve different names for the same
> underlying type, and so are different from what you are asking for
> here.
Also note that we already have NCHAR [VARYING]. It's mapped to char or
varchar, respectively, in the parser, just like int, real, etc. are handled.
