| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why do indexes and sorts use the database collation? |
| Date: | 2023-11-14 16:05:35 |
| Message-ID: | 3ae33426-40ed-4c6b-b2cb-9ba4125bc69d@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13.11.23 17:49, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-11-13 at 13:43 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 11.11.23 01:03, Jeff Davis wrote:
>>> But the database collation is always deterministic,
>>
>> So far!
>
> Yeah, if we did that, clearly the index collation would need to match
> that of the database to be useful. What are the main challenges in
> allowing non-deterministic collations at the database level?
Text pattern matching operations (LIKE, ~) don't work.
"Allowing" here is the right word. We could enable it, and it would
work just fine, but because of the restriction I mentioned, the
experience would not be very pleasant.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-11-14 16:05:53 | Re: retire MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren backwards compatibility macro |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2023-11-14 16:03:18 | Re: should check collations when creating partitioned index |