| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Radek Strnad" <radek(dot)strnad(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level |
| Date: | 2008-07-02 18:22:10 |
| Message-ID: | 871w2ccfjh.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Why does a collation have a schema?
>
> Because the SQL spec says so. Also, if we don't put them in schemas,
> we have no nice way to distinguish built-in and user-defined collations,
> which creates a problem for pg_dump.
Out of curiosity, what is a "user-defined collation"? Are there SQL statements
to go around declaring what order code points should be sorted in? That seems
like it would be... quite tedious!
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication support!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2008-07-02 19:11:39 | Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level |
| Previous Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2008-07-02 18:12:17 | Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements |