Re: Fixing row comparison semantics

[Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>]

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> One thing my COLLATE patch does is distinguish between collations and
> operator classes. So the reverse operator class issue disappears
> because it's just a collation and doesn't need a operator class
> (although it won't break anything, see below).

Are you suggesting that COLLATE will impose comparison semantics on
all datatypes including non-string types?  If so, I'd be interested
to know what you have in mind.  If not, claiming that it makes the
issue go away is nonsensical.

			regards, tom lane