| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add CASEFOLD() function. |
| Date: | 2025-06-19 17:38:54 |
| Message-ID: | 81AFE376-ACFE-4F78-A33B-9B5F2339FDA7@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 19, 2025, at 12:59, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> No. But given the options, I would personally choose nondeterministic collations now that they are available. I just wish they were more user-friendly as I suspect the majority of people either won't know about them, or won't know how to use them.
I suspect there are a lot of uses of citext for databases created before nondeterministic collations existed and people are unaware of them or unclear on the migration path from one to the other, let alone implications for any infrastructure they built around cutest (like function signatures and return values). As long as citext conteinues to be maintained there and there’s no super clear path to migrate, I’d bet good money that few would bother to switch.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-06-19 17:41:57 | Re: Improve the performance of Unicode Normalization Forms. |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2025-06-19 16:59:08 | Re: Add CASEFOLD() function. |