| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint |
| Date: | 2020-01-24 00:21:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+KLCKGoFQsfVU-++BU3+0Eodw6PH+HrmA8G9aZK+zCNg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 11:12 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I happened to notice this comment in the logic in
> ATAddForeignKeyConstraint that tries to decide if it can skip
> revalidating a foreign-key constraint after a DDL change:
>
> * Since we require that all collations share the same notion of
> * equality (which they do, because texteq reduces to bitwise
> * equality), we don't compare collation here.
>
> Hasn't this been broken by the introduction of nondeterministic
> collations?
Similar words appear in the comment for ri_GenerateQualCollation().
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2020-01-24 00:27:40 | Re: making the backend's json parser work in frontend code |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-01-23 22:11:57 | Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint |