| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 |
| Date: | 2008-07-08 00:26:24 |
| Message-ID: | 372ED376-DF77-4810-A7B5-27DD1D0BD772@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jul 7, 2008, at 17:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> No, but you were: you proposed using strncmp for everything.
Yes, that's right. I was trying to understand why I wouldn't use just
one or the other. And the answer turned out to be, you wouldn't,
except that strncmp() is an desirable optimization for = and <>. So
I've changed only those.
Phew, I think I'm clear now. Thanks!
DAvid
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2008-07-08 00:34:39 | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-07-08 00:21:16 | Re: Data type OID numbers fixed? |