Re: Proposal: Multiversion page api (inplace upgrade) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Denne
Subject Re: Proposal: Multiversion page api (inplace upgrade)
Date
Msg-id F0238EBA67824444BC1CB4700960CB480588CC68@dmpeints002.isotach.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal: Multiversion page api (inplace upgrade)  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
>
> > (Likely counterexample: adding collation info to text values.)
>
> I don't think the argument really needs an example, but I
> would be pretty
> upset if we proposed tagging every text datum with a
> collation. Encoding
> perhaps, though that seems like a bad idea to me on
> performance grounds, but
> collation is not a property of the data at all.

Again not directly related to difficulties upgrading pages...

The recent discussion ...
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-06/msg00102.php
... mentions keeping collation information together with text data,
however it is referring to keeping it together when processing it,
not when storing the text.

Regards,
Stephen Denne.
--
At the Datamail Group we value teamwork, respect, achievement, client focus, and courage.
This email with any attachments is confidential and may be subject to legal privilege.
If it is not intended for you please advise by replying immediately, destroy it and do not
copy, disclose or use it in any way.

The Datamail Group, through our GoGreen programme, is committed to environmental sustainability.
Help us in our efforts by not printing this email.
__________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the DMZGlobal
BusinessQuality             Electronic Messaging Suite. 
Please see http://www.dmzglobal.com/dmzmessaging.htm for details.
__________________________________________________________________




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: cannot use result of (insert..returning)
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS