| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "James Pang (chaolpan)" <chaolpan(at)cisco(dot)com>, "pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: database collation "C" and "C.LATIN1" |
| Date: | 2023-03-09 14:35:49 |
| Message-ID: | 374722.1678372549@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> On Thu, 2023-03-09 at 08:37 +0000, James Pang (chaolpan) wrote:
>> Both follow "C" collate behavior ,right?
> Right.
There is another difference: "C" is a built-in collation, while
"C.latin1" must have been something that initdb made because
"locale -a" claimed it exists on your platform. Postgres has
some optimizations built in for "C" (and its equivalent "POSIX")
that will not apply for "C.latin1". So while they should be
behaviorally the same, "C.latin1" is likely to be slower.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Wells Oliver | 2023-03-09 15:19:59 | Malformed array literal in goin from jsonb to real[] |
| Previous Message | Sumit Sengupta | 2023-03-09 13:09:25 | Re: postgresql to Oracle database migration |