| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: UTF8MatchText |
| Date: | 2007-05-20 22:02:10 |
| Message-ID: | 17534.1179698530@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>>> Yeah, quite possibly. I'm also wondering if we are wasting effort
>>> downcasing what will in most cases be the same pattern over and over
>>> again. Maybe we need to look at memoizing that somehow, or at least test
>>> to see if that would be a gain.
>>
>> Someone (Itagaki-san IIRC) suggested that we ought to convert
>> "x ILIKE y" into "lower(x) LIKE lower(y)" at some fairly early
>> stage, definitely before constant-folding in the planner.
>>
> Sounds like a TODO item. I'm already concerned a bit about scope creep
> for this item.
Agreed, I don't want to tackle this right now --- I'm just suggesting
it's probably a better answer than memoizing at runtime.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-05-20 22:11:13 | Re: UTF8MatchText |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-05-20 21:58:32 | Re: UTF8MatchText |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-05-20 22:11:13 | Re: UTF8MatchText |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2007-05-20 22:01:32 | Synchronized Scan |