Re: Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKG+KLCKGoFQsfVU-++BU3+0Eodw6PH+HrmA8G9aZK+zCNg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 11:12 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I happened to notice this comment in the logic in
> ATAddForeignKeyConstraint that tries to decide if it can skip
> revalidating a foreign-key constraint after a DDL change:
>
>              * Since we require that all collations share the same notion of
>              * equality (which they do, because texteq reduces to bitwise
>              * equality), we don't compare collation here.
>
> Hasn't this been broken by the introduction of nondeterministic
> collations?

Similar words appear in the comment for ri_GenerateQualCollation().



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Busted(?) optimization in ATAddForeignKeyConstraint
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: making the backend's json parser work in frontend code