Re: insensitive collations - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andreas Karlsson
Subject Re: insensitive collations
Date
Msg-id 9fd63f66-fb85-9bb9-2499-28dac918161a@proxel.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: insensitive collations  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: insensitive collations
List pgsql-hackers
On 12/28/18 9:55 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Here is an updated patch.
> 
> I have updated the naming to "deterministic", as discussed.

Maybe this is orthogonal and best handled elsewhere but have you when 
working with string equality given unicode normalization forms[1] any 
thought? I feel there are three sane ways to do unicode string equality:

1) Binary equality
2) Binary equality after normalizing the unicode
3) Collation equality

Would there be any point in adding unicode normalization support into 
the collation system or is this best handle for example with a function 
run on INSERT or with something else entirely?

Right now PosgreSQL does not have any support for normalization forms as 
far as I know.

1. http://unicode.org/reports/tr15/

Andreas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Bossart, Nathan"
Date:
Subject: Re: A few new options for vacuumdb
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: reducing the footprint of ScanKeyword (was Re: Large writable variables)