Re: Collation & ctype method table, and extension hooks

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Collation & ctype method table, and extension hooks
Date: 2024-11-01 18:17:09
Message-ID: 25e8c88b2567ba4deb82d6752eef9bc1f9753919.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2024-11-01 at 14:08 +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> > Agreed -- a lot of work has gone into optimizing the regex code,
> > and we
> > don't want a perf regression there. But I'm also not sure exactly
> > which
> > kinds of tests I should be running for that.
>
> I think we should at least try to find the worst case to see how big
> the
> performance hit for that is. And then after that try to figure out a
> more typical case benchmark.

What I had in mind was:

* a large table with a single ~100KiB text field
* a scan with a case insensitive regex that uses some character
classes

Does that sound like a worst case?

> The painful part was mostly just a reference to that without a
> catalog
> table where new providers can be added we would need to add
> collations
> for our new custom provider on some already existing provider and
> then
> do for example some pattern matching on the name of the new
> collation.
> Really ugly but works.

To add a catalog table for the locale providers, the main challenge is
around the database default collation and, relatedly, initdb. Do you
have some ideas around that?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nikita Malakhov 2024-11-01 18:18:47 Re: Considering fractional paths in Append node
Previous Message Andres Freund 2024-11-01 18:10:54 Re: AIO writes vs hint bits vs checksums