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

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

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, 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: 2008-07-29 16:09:58
Message-ID: 4C5FD1C2-A5AB-41C7-8503-7A6CC33E32F7@kineticode.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Jul 28, 2008, at 18:31, Tom Lane wrote:

>> To upgrade from citext, I expect
>> that what one will have to do is to alter the column to change its
>> data type from citext to TEXT + collation.
>
> What I'm wondering is how closely that will match the semantics of the
> contrib module ...

By "semantics" do you mean behavior, in terms of how closely operator  
comparisons will return the same results? I have no idea, personally,  
but it's no worse then TEXT, is it? The use of TEXT and LOWER() being  
what people are doing now?

Best,

David

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-29 16:24:59
Subject: Re: Python 2.5 vs the buildfarm
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-07-29 15:58:00
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

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