From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Pre-proposal: unicode normalized text |
Date: | 2023-10-03 22:55:32 |
Message-ID: | b28354e5b228ef3ec742112e11442486718336af.camel@j-davis.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2023-10-02 at 10:47 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I think a better direction here would be to work toward making
> nondeterministic collations usable on the global/database level and
> then
> encouraging users to use those.
>
> It's also not clear which way the performance tradeoffs would fall.
>
> Nondeterministic collations are obviously going to be slower, but by
> how
> much? People have accepted moving from C locale to "real" locales
> because they needed those semantics. Would it be any worse moving
> from
> real locales to "even realer" locales?
If you normalize first, then you can get some semantic improvements
without giving up on the stability and performance of memcmp(). That
seems like a win with zero costs in terms of stability or performance
(except perhaps some extra text->utext casts).
Going to a "real" locale gives more semantic benefits but at a very
high cost: depending on a collation provider library, dealing with
collation changes, and performance costs. While supporting the use of
nondeterministic collations at the database level may be a good idea,
it's not helping to reach the compromise that I'm trying to reach in
this thread.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nico Williams | 2023-10-03 23:01:16 | Re: Pre-proposal: unicode normalized text |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2023-10-03 22:34:44 | Re: Pre-proposal: unicode normalized text |