Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> and then the bit below about ...
>> needs to move into the "non-collation-aware" branch.
> Right. Alternatively, you could actually call varstr_cmp() within the
> "non-collation-aware" branch.
True. This way saves a few cycles, but maybe it's not worth the extra
code. I think the only case where you could really notice the difference
is for an equality search operator, which might end up doing a lot more
work in non-C collations (full-blown strcoll vs memcmp).
regards, tom lane