Re: [WIP] patch - Collation at database level

------=_Part_3603_14452327.1215026466307
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

My patch should be "sort of" wrapper that will implement guts for further
development (collation at column level) like catalogs, creating collations
etc. When creating collation user will be able to choose which function to
use (by statement STRCOLFN - not in SQL standard). In the first stage I'll
implement function that will use system locales. Adding ICU or any other
library won't be that big deal.

Radek Strnad

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Gregory Stark <stark@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

> "Tom Lane" <tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >> Why does a collation have a schema?
> >
> > Because the SQL spec says so.  Also, if we don't put them in schemas,
> > we have no nice way to distinguish built-in and user-defined
collations,
> > which creates a problem for pg_dump.
>
> Out of curiosity, what is a "user-defined collation"? Are there SQL
> statements
> to go around declaring what order code points should be sorted in? That
> seems
> like it would be... quite tedious!
>
> --
>  Gregory Stark
>  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com
>  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication sup****t!
>

------=_Part_3603_14452327.1215026466307
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

My patch should be &quot;sort of&quot; wrapper that will implement guts
for
further development (collation at column level) like catalogs, creating
collations etc. When creating collation user will be able to choose
which function to use (by statement STRCOLFN - not in SQL standard). In
the first stage I&#39;ll implement function that will use system locales.
Adding ICU or any other library won&#39;t be that big deal.<br><font
color="#888888">
<br>Radek Strnad</font><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 2,
2008 at 8:22 PM, Gregory Stark &lt;<a
href="mailto:stark@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">stark@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>&gt;
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">&quot;Tom Lane&quot; &lt;<a
href="mailto:tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>&gt; writes:<br>
<br>
&gt; Alvaro Herrera &lt;<a
href="mailto:alvherre@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
">alvherre@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>&gt;
writes:<br>
&gt;&gt; Why does a collation have a schema?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Because the SQL spec says so. &nbsp;Also, if we don&#39;t put them in
schemas,<br>
&gt; we have no nice way to distinguish built-in and user-defined
collations,<br>
&gt; which creates a problem for pg_dump.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Out of curiosity, what is a &quot;user-defined
collation&quot;? Are there SQL statements<br>
to go around declaring what order code points should be sorted in? That
seems<br>
like it would be... quite tedious!<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
 &nbsp;Gregory Stark<br>
 &nbsp;EnterpriseDB &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;<a
href="http://www.enterprisedb.com"
target="_blank">http://www.enterprisedb.com</a><br>
 &nbsp;Ask me about EnterpriseDB&#39;s Slony Replication sup****t!<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_3603_14452327.1215026466307--