Re: record identical operator
| От | Steve Singer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: record identical operator |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | BLU0-SMTP59248B3547C08E0DB35B47DC200@phx.gbl обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: record identical operator (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: record identical operator
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/18/2013 11:39 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > * Kevin Grittner (kgrittn@ymail.com) wrote: >> = and <> aren't listed above even though they do a byte-for-byte >> comparison because, well, I guess because we have chosen to treat >> two UTF8 strings which produce the same set of glyphs using >> different bytes as unequal. :-/ > I tend to side with Andres on this case actually- we're being asked to > store specific UTF8 bytes by the end user. That is not the same as > treating two different numerics which are the same *number* as > different because they have different binary representations, which is > entirely an internal-to-postgres consideration. The problem is that there are datatypes (citext, postgis,...) that have defined = to return true when comparing two values that are different not just stored differently. Are you saying that matview's should update only when the = operator of the datatype returns false and if people don't like this behaviour they should fix the datatypes? > Thanks, > > Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: