On 14/12/2018 20:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> Now, it's certainly true that nameeq() doesn't need a collation spec
> today, any more than texteq() does, because both types legislate that
> equality is bitwise. But if we leave ExecBuildGroupingEqual like this,
> we're mandating that no type anywhere, ever, can have a
> collation-dependent notion of equality. Is that really a restriction
> we're comfortable with? citext is sort of the poster child here,
> because it already wishes it could have collation-dependent equality.
I have just posted my "insensitive collations" patch that contains code
to fix this.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
