Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'd like to see this implemented with more general collation support in
mind.
I'm really not prepared to buy into that, simply because it puts ICU or
some equivalent large chunk of new code into the critical path to finish
what I'm doing. ...
Yeah, I didn't mean doing that right now. Just to keep it in mind so
that what we do now fits in nicely with it in the future.
The NULLS FIRST/LAST support, as well as ascending and descending
orderings would be special cases of the general collation and collation
conversion machinery.
That seems like a bad idea, because nulls first/last and asc/desc
ordering are valid concepts for all btree-indexable datatypes, whereas
collation is only meaningful for text. Besides, that approach just
moves the bloat over from too-many-opclasses to too-many-collations; do
we really want to need four collation objects for each basic collation?
Hmm, I guess we don't.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
