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