| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, lr(at)pcorp(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/citext versus collations |
| Date: | 2011-06-06 20:19:48 |
| Message-ID: | 4AADA7A0-BB6E-4B22-B108-9D1036409302@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 6, 2011, at 1:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The most workable alternative that I can see is to lobotomize citext so
> that it always does lower-casing according to the database's "default"
> collation, which would allow us to pretend that its notion of equality
> is not collation-sensitive after all.
+1 Seems like the right thing to do for now.
> We could hope to improve this in
> future release cycles, but not till we've done the infrastructure work
> outlined above. One bit of infrastructure that might be a good idea is
> a flag to indicate whether an equality operator's behavior is
> potentially collation-dependent, so that we could avoid taking
> performance hits in the normal case.
That sounds like a good idea.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Janes | 2011-06-06 21:09:35 | Re: WALInsertLock tuning |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-06-06 20:14:25 | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |