| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Radek Strnad <radek(dot)strnad(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level |
| Date: | 2008-07-08 13:49:19 |
| Message-ID: | 7808.1215524959@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)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.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Roberts, Jon | 2008-07-08 14:00:28 | Re: pg crashing |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-07-08 13:39:39 | Re: CommitFest rules |