Re: pg_trgm - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tatsuo Ishii
Subject Re: pg_trgm
Date
Msg-id 20100528.005124.14213795.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_trgm  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
> So I think a GUC is broken because pg_tgrm has a index opclasses and
> any indexes built using one setting will be broken if the GUC is
> changed.
> 
> Perhaps we need two sets of functions (which presumably call the same
> implementation with a flag to indicate which definition to use). Then
> you can define an index using one or the other and the meaning would
> be stable.

It's worse. pg_trgm has another compile option "IGNORECASE" which
might affect index opclasses.
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Straightforward Synchronous Replication
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: List traffic