Re: tsearch_core for inclusion

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>
Cc: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tsearch_core for inclusion
Date: 2007-03-26 17:55:37
Message-ID: 3816.1174931737@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> writes:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
>> Isn't the real problem that only _one_ configuration per locale should
>> be marked as DEFAULT at any time, no matter what schema it is in?

> I'm not sure I understand you correct (a bit complex :), but it's allowed
> to have only _one_ DEFAULT configuration per schema/per locale. So,
> visibility is defined by search_path for given locale.

Not sure that that's a good idea at all. We used to have
search-path-dependent rules for deciding which opclass was default,
and found that that was not good. Also, I do not understand how
the queries and the indexes are tied together --- but doesn't an
index need to be built using the same rules that are later expected
by the queries? If that varies on search_path it'll be too fragile.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-03-26 18:01:20 Re: pg_index updates and SI invalidation
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-03-26 17:52:00 Re: Guarenteeing complex referencial integrity through custom triggers