| From: | Pierre-Aurélien GEORGES <Pierre-Aurelien(dot)GEORGES(at)univ-cotedazur(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pageorge(at)unice(dot)fr, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Does the POSITION() function takes into account the COLLATION... or not ?!? |
| Date: | 2022-02-16 11:01:18 |
| Message-ID: | ead8dcb5-e1c0-174f-c609-61843f9fa1de@univ-cotedazur.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
ok, let's take it forwards, then :-)
Can someone provide some examples where a supported deterministic
collation is having an impact on the result of a call to function
POSITION() ?
(as I said in my message, examples would be greatly appreciated)
Le 16/02/2022 à 11:56, Peter Eisentraut a écrit :
> On 15.02.22 17:17, PG Doc comments form wrote:
>> Does the POSITION() function pretends taking into account the
>> COLLATION ??
>> or not ??
>>
>> - If not, then why the hell is there this error message about
>> nondeterministic collations while the POSITION() doesn't care at all
>> about
>> the COLLATION...
>> - If yes, then the first 6 lines of SQL above are returning the wrong
>> value... (are there any specific technical limitations here ?)
>
> I think you have that backwards. Your examples would only succeed if
> POSITION() supported nondeterministic collations, but it doesn't.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-02-16 14:07:08 | Re: Does the POSITION() function takes into account the COLLATION... or not ?!? |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-02-16 10:56:17 | Re: Does the POSITION() function takes into account the COLLATION... or not ?!? |