Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3
Date: 2008-07-14 14:26:58
Message-ID: 7928.1216045618@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 12, 2008, at 14:57, Tom Lane wrote:
>> 4. A lot of the later test cases are equally uselessly testing whether
>> piggybacking over text functions works.

> I'd like to keep these tests, since they ensure not just that the
> functions work but that they work with citext.

It might be reasonable to test a couple of them for that purpose.
If your agenda is "test every function in the system that comes or
might come in a bpchar variant", I think that's pointless.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2008-07-14 15:20:25 Re: 8.1 index corruption woes
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-07-14 14:24:50 Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3