| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Khandekar <amitdkhan(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: strcmp() tie-breaker for identical ICU-collated strings |
| Date: | 2017-06-09 17:45:33 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY-==Lk+L5scbd4rFy308u8ZWYnXaBARNPSa=x4M1=sbQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm not exactly sure what is possible or
>> desirable, but I would not be too surprised to hear complaints about
>> the observed behavior different from the "pure" ICU behavior because
>> of the tiebreak, and at least some users might even find it worth
>> giving up hashing in order to get the exact sort order they need.
>
> But they are getting the sort order they need. They just don't get the
> equality semantics they expect.
You're right.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-06-09 17:45:34 | Re: strcmp() tie-breaker for identical ICU-collated strings |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-09 17:14:30 | Re: partial aggregation with internal state type |