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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

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