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
