Re: Collation versioning

From: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Collation versioning
Date: 2018-09-12 08:15:48
Message-ID: 20180912081547.GA24584@msg.df7cb.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Re: Thomas Munro 2018-09-07 <CAEepm=1xGTsLDx63UEdcJ8MdG63CNJ-tsDWHbH9djtvxRH5ZWw(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> 2. We could remove datcollate and datctype and instead store a
> collation OID. I'm not sure what problems would come up, but for
> starters it seems a bit weird to have a shared catalog pointing to
> rows in a non-shared catalog.

Naive idea: make that catalog shared? Collations are system-wide after
all.

Christoph

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Lakhin 2018-09-12 08:26:00 Re: make installcheck-world in a clean environment
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-09-12 07:38:30 Re: [HACKERS] Cutting initdb's runtime (Perl question embedded)