Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date: 2008-07-28 19:42:40
Message-ID: 488E2130.6070701@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>   
>> ISTM that Tom's objection is really that citext is a hack, and that it 
>> will actually make it harder for us to get to a collation-based case 
>> insensitive comparison.
>>     
>
> 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.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-28 19:49:21
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Previous:From: Andrew GierthDate: 2008-07-28 19:35:26
Subject: Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group