public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Peter Geoghegan <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: Finnerty, Jim <[email protected]>
Cc: Nasby, Jim <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Jeremy Schneider <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Collation version tracking for macOS
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2022 18:05:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAH2-WzkWM2Ui2QKMmOgvi7Lb8XZo-Bdoy1ae9gm7Dz1ynJp88Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+hUKG+vGwo4uhrOzqR-nsATn-1kH+XUNprGga3MX_KnEw0DNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CA+hUKGKjkL=APm5nd3vGOtMAD_07nyvrbAaGaDduVD-EKM5Drw@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+hUKGLwT9xBSodtmio-NnGXfkrfVs02O6kg1iwBJSt-XMhW4g@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CA+hUKGJ_CMXi6G1975Eo7S28Udri-3+FasF0+eNL5RVt4O=J8A@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-Wzke2fShu2SQy53dywwJBgbj25uJ4P1NHXUvNqf5VHo_mQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKGL4VZRpP3CkjYQkv4RQ6pRYkPkSNgKSxFBwciECQ0mEuQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-Wz=23GAPCdVRwbDUSgP9Ec1X1eDu4Z+4hshUMfK_gSniFw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKG+PNqUn5oG6hFgPcy7AyxuSbpNKo-u=Bobe=dn7k8sVZw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-Wzn1jLoe17eEPgHS=q_cnDJ35NNk3kiMgAbQ+i_vd1Uv6w@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKGJbRBbDHsp6erRpckDa41mH+0UHsTqd1MZSpZVi-mj55A@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAH2-Wzmo74tMCLTHJm-WfbbjThoY9+fyzj+SHHY_W5edgmv+8g@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKGJ7dfvu4i_UMOKK9ufG_BcXaYbKNJaPYKA7BH4NyRPTTQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAH2-Wz=G3Y67WDGE_Vv1_wxnZoYxa+ie8YYgjGi98DzFa1tHGg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+hUKG+vGwo4uhrOzqR-nsATn-1kH+XUNprGga3MX_KnEw0DNw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 5:59 PM Thomas Munro <[email protected]> wrote:
> That sounds nice, but introduces subtle problems for the planner. For
> example, pathkeys that look compatible might not be, when
> merge-joining an ICU 63 index scan against an ICU 67 index scan. You
> could teach it about that, whereas with my distinct OID concept they
> would already be considered non-matching automatically.
Right -- my proposal is likely to be more difficult to implement.
Seems like it might be worth going to the trouble of teaching the
planner about this difference, though.
That exact issue seems like the true underlying problem to me: we have
two sets of behaviors for a given collation, that are equivalent for
some purposes (the user thinks of them as totally interchangeable),
but not for other purposes (we can't expect old indexes to continue to
work with a new physical collation for their logical collation). So
directly tackling that seems natural to me.
--
Peter Geoghegan
view thread (139+ 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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Collation version tracking for macOS
In-Reply-To: <CAH2-WzkWM2Ui2QKMmOgvi7Lb8XZo-Bdoy1ae9gm7Dz1ynJp88Q@mail.gmail.com>
* 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