Re: should check collations when creating partitioned index
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-11-14T16:15:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: > On 13.11.23 21:04, Laurenz Albe wrote: >> This will be backpatched, right? What if somebody already created an index like that? >> Does this warrant an entry in the "however" for the release notes, or is the case >> exotic enough that we can assume that nobody is affected? > I think it's exotic enough that I wouldn't bother backpatching it. But > I welcome input on this. I think it should be back-patched. I don't love the patch details though. It seems entirely wrong to check this before we check the opclass match. Also, in at least some cases the code presses on looking for another match if the current opclass doesn't match; you've broken such cases. regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Check collation when creating partitioned index
- 5d40b3c4f6ca 12.18 landed
- 3c49fa2aff2c 13.14 landed
- e846fc491923 14.11 landed
- 15d485921b1c 15.6 landed
- 267f33f68417 16.2 landed
- a11c9c42ea31 17.0 landed