Re: Collation order for btree-indexable datatypes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephan Szabo
Subject Re: Collation order for btree-indexable datatypes
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.21.0105021603260.50100-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Collation order for btree-indexable datatypes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2 May 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> > What parts of the changes would require an initdb, would new
> > functions need to be added or the index ops need to change or would
> > it be fixes to the existing functions (if the latter, wouldn't a recompile
> > and dropping/recreating the indexes be enough?)
> 
> Yes, dropping and recreating any user indexes that contain the problematic
> values would be sufficient to get you out of trouble.  We don't need any
> system catalog changes for this, AFAICS.

Looking back, I misread the original message.  I thought you were saying
that it needed to wait for an initdb and so would be bad in a dot release,
but it was just the breaking of indexes thing, but since they're already
pretty broken, I don't see much of a loss by fixing it.




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: XFS File systems and PostgreSQL
Next
From: Doug McNaught
Date:
Subject: Re: XFS File systems and PostgreSQL