| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why do indexes and sorts use the database collation? |
| Date: | 2023-11-13 16:49:59 |
| Message-ID: | 23ba35f4bd8aa698ecdea939d71ed7b9531c6711.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 13:43 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11.11.23 01:03, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > But the database collation is always deterministic,
>
> So far!
Yeah, if we did that, clearly the index collation would need to match
that of the database to be useful. What are the main challenges in
allowing non-deterministic collations at the database level?
If someone opts into a collation (and surely a non-deterministic
collation would be opt-in), then I think it makes sense that they
accept some performance costs and dependency versioning risks for the
functionality.
My point still stands that all deterministic collations are, at least
for equality, identical.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2023-11-13 16:57:56 | Re: How to solve the problem of one backend process crashing and causing other processes to restart? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-11-13 16:25:21 | Re: trying again to get incremental backup |