| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 |
| Date: | 2008-07-08 00:18:40 |
| Message-ID: | 26034.1215476320@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Jul 7, 2008, at 16:58, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If that's so, you certainly can't use strncmp, because that would
>> result
>> in sort orderings totally different from lower()'s result. Even
>> without
>> that argument, for most multibyte cases you'd get a pretty arbitrary,
>> user-unfriendly sort ordering.
> Now I'm confused again. :-( Whether or not I use strncmp() or
> varstr_cmp(), I first lowercase the value to be compared using
> str_tolower(). What Zdenek has said is, that aside, just as for the
> TEXT type, I should use strncmp() for = and <>, and varstr_cmp() for
> everything else. Are you saying something different?
No, but you were: you proposed using strncmp for everything.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-08 00:21:16 | Re: Data type OID numbers fixed? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-07-08 00:16:55 | Re: Data type OID numbers fixed? |