Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level
| От | Michael Paesold |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | EEA0C5EF-E9F7-4D45-BB3F-4B9EE2302CA2@gmx.at обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes: >> Martijn van Oosterhout napsal(a): >>> Not necessarily. pg_class is not shared yet without it you can't >>> even >>> find pg_database. Same deal with pg_type. All it means is that >>> pg_collation in template1 must contain all the collations used in >>> template1, which shouldn't be hard to arrange. > >> I think, Collation situation is different, > > All the argument here is based on the premise that we should have > database-level collation specifications, which AFAICS is not required > nor suggested by the SQL spec. I wonder why we are allowing a > nonstandard half-measure to drive our thinking, rather than solving > the > real problem which is column-level collations. Wouldn't you still need per-database and per-table default collations? At least MySQL does have such a concept. Best Regards Michael Paesold
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: