Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Date
Msg-id 200807291053.27580.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Am Monday, 28. July 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
> But to define such a domain, you'd have to commit to a case-insensitive
> version of a specific collation, no?  citext currently means "case
> insensitive version of whatever the database's default collation is".

So in the future, someone using citext with lc_collate = en_US attempting to 
upgrade would then define
   CREATE DOMAIN citext AS text COLLATION "en_US@ci"

And yes, you would potentially have different definitions of this citext 
domain in different database clusters, depending on what configuration you 
are upgrading from, but I don't see that as a problem.  It is the natural 
thing to do.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jan Urbański
Date:
Subject: Re: gsoc, oprrest function for text search
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Python 2.5 vs the buildfarm