Re: orderRules() now a bad idea?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: orderRules() now a bad idea?
Date: 2002-10-15 20:36:34
Message-ID: 18275.1034714194@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> But alphabetical? According to whose definition of the alphabet?

It looks like NAME comparison uses strcmp (actually strncmp). So it'll
be numeric byte-code order.

There's no particular reason we couldn't make that be strcoll instead,
I suppose, except perhaps speed.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-10-15 20:42:18 Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-15 20:13:02 Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c