Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Дата
Msg-id 27082.1217274561@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Ответы Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, it won't make it harder to implement collations; but I worry that
>> people who have been relying on the citext syntax will have a hard time
>> migrating to collations.  Perhaps if someone did the legwork to
>> determine exactly what that conversion would look like, it would assuage
>> the fear.

> I kind of assumed we would do it by implementing the COLLATE clause of 
> the CREATE DOMAIN statement.

But to define such a domain, you'd have to commit to a case-insensitive
version of a specific collation, no?  citext currently means "case
insensitive version of whatever the database's default collation is".
This might be worrying over nothing significant, but I'm not
convinced...
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Следующее
От: Andrew Gierth
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723