Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Asko Oja <ascoja(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date: 2008-07-28 22:48:24
Message-ID: 29907.1217285304@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> That said, this is no more of a deal than that text also has a default
> collation. You talk about "the database's default collation" but with
> proper collation support that statement is meaningless.

Well, we had better still be able to support the concept, or a lot
of applications that work fine today will fail.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2008-07-28 22:54:28 Re: [RFC] Unsigned integer support.
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2008-07-28 22:24:46 Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723