Re: Can pg_trgm handle non-alphanumeric characters? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From MauMau
Subject Re: Can pg_trgm handle non-alphanumeric characters?
Date
Msg-id 6A03E28C25F24EA1AD941E37DDFD90D5@maumau
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Can pg_trgm handle non-alphanumeric characters?  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Can pg_trgm handle non-alphanumeric characters?
List pgsql-hackers
From: "Fujii Masao" <masao.fujii@gmail.com>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com> wrote:
>> On 09-05-2012 19:17, MauMau wrote:
>>> Then, does it make sense to remove "#define KEEPONLYALNUM" in 9.1.4? 
>>> Would it
>>> cause any problems? If no, I wish that, because it eliminates the need 
>>> to do
>>> the removal every time the users applies minor releases.
>>>
>> If you do so, you'll break minor versions.
>
> Right. And removing KEEPONLYALNUM is a feature change rather than bug fix,
> so that should be proposed during major version development cycle.

For information, what kind of breakage would occur? Is it performance 
degradation, extra index storage consumption, or undesirable query results? 
I imagined removing KEEPONLYALNUM would just accept non-alphanumeric 
characters and cause no harm to those who use only alphanumeric characters.

Regards
MauMau



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Florian Pflug
Date:
Subject: Re: Gsoc2012 idea, tablesample
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Draft release notes complete