| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wrong Results from SP-GiST with Collations |
| Date: | 2018-04-16 19:28:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20362.1523906934@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> and then the bit below about ...
>> needs to move into the "non-collation-aware" branch.
> Right. Alternatively, you could actually call varstr_cmp() within the
> "non-collation-aware" branch.
True. This way saves a few cycles, but maybe it's not worth the extra
code. I think the only case where you could really notice the difference
is for an equality search operator, which might end up doing a lot more
work in non-C collations (full-blown strcoll vs memcmp).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-04-16 19:31:08 | Re: Standby corruption after master is restarted |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-04-16 19:19:36 | Re: Wrong Results from SP-GiST with Collations |