public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: should check collations when creating partitioned index
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 15:18:57 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

Jeff Davis <[email protected]> writes:
> In the patch, you check for an exact collation match. Considering this
> case only depends on equality, I think it would be correct if the
> requirement was that (a) both collations are deterministic; or (b) the
> collations match exactly.

You keep harping on this idea that we are only concerned with equality,
but I think you are wrong.  We expect a btree index to provide ordering
not only equality, and this example definitely is a btree index.

Possibly, with a great deal more specificity added to the check, we
could distinguish the cases where ordering can't matter and allow
collation variance then.  I do not see the value of that, especially
not when measured against the risk of introducing subtle bugs.

			regards, tom lane

view thread (4+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: should check collations when creating partitioned index
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox