Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2015-03-19 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 10:33:33PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:42:20PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > > No. And we don't know how to change the default opclass without > > > breaking things, either. > > > > Is

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-29 Thread Oleg Bartunov
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Heikki Linnakangas < hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > On 09/15/2014 06:28 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > >> Hackers, >> >> some GIN opclasses uses collation-aware comparisons while they don't need >> to do especially collation-aware comparison. Examples are text

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-29 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 09/15/2014 06:28 PM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: Hackers, some GIN opclasses uses collation-aware comparisons while they don't need to do especially collation-aware comparison. Examples are text[] and hstore opclasses. Hmm. It would be nice to use the index for inequality searches, at least

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 03:42:20PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > > No. And we don't know how to change the default opclass without > > breaking things, either. > > Is there a page on the Wiki along the lines of "things that we would > like to

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-28 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 06:56:24PM +0400, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > > > > Changing the default opclasses should work if we make > > > pg_dump --binary-upgrade dump the default opclasses with indexes > > > and exclusion constra

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-16 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > > > Changing the default opclasses should work if we make > > > pg_dump --binary-upgrade dump the default opclasses with indexes > > > and exclusion constraints. I think it makes sense to do so in > > > --binary-upgrade mode. I can try to

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-16 Thread Emre Hasegeli
> > Changing the default opclasses should work if we make > > pg_dump --binary-upgrade dump the default opclasses with indexes > > and exclusion constraints. I think it makes sense to do so in > > --binary-upgrade mode. I can try to come with a patch for this. > > Can you explain it a bit more d

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-16 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Emre Hasegeli wrote: > Changing the default opclasses should work if we make > pg_dump --binary-upgrade dump the default opclasses with indexes > and exclusion constraints. I think it makes sense to do so in > --binary-upgrade mode. I can try to come with a pat

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-16 Thread Emre Hasegeli
> No. And we don't know how to change the default opclass without > breaking things, either. See previous discussions about how we > might fix the totally-broken default gist opclass that btree_gist > creates for the inet type [1]. The motivation for getting rid of that > is *way* stronger than

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-16 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Geoghegan writes: > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Alexander Korotkov > > wrote: > >> Rename such opclasses and make them not default. > >> Create new default opclasses with bitwise comparison functions. > >> Write recommendation to

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > No. And we don't know how to change the default opclass without > breaking things, either. Is there a page on the Wiki along the lines of "things that we would like to change if ever there is a substantial change in on-disk format that will bre

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-15 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Geoghegan writes: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: >> Rename such opclasses and make them not default. >> Create new default opclasses with bitwise comparison functions. >> Write recommendation to re-create indexes with default opclasses into >> documentation.

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-15 Thread Alexander Korotkov
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Alexander Korotkov > wrote: > > some GIN opclasses uses collation-aware comparisons while they don't > need to > > do especially collation-aware comparison. Examples are text[] and hstore > > opclasses. D

Re: [HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-15 Thread Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote: > some GIN opclasses uses collation-aware comparisons while they don't need to > do especially collation-aware comparison. Examples are text[] and hstore > opclasses. Depending on collation this may make them a much slower. I'm glad that

[HACKERS] Collation-aware comparisons in GIN opclasses

2014-09-15 Thread Alexander Korotkov
Hackers, some GIN opclasses uses collation-aware comparisons while they don't need to do especially collation-aware comparison. Examples are text[] and hstore opclasses. Depending on collation this may make them a much slower. See example. # show lc_collate ; lc_collate ─ ru_RU.UTF