On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Marcel van Pinxteren
wrote:
To be honest, the reason I don't want to use citext and lower(), is me being
lazy. If I have to use these features, there is more work for me converting
from SQL Server to Postgresql. I have to make more changes to my database,
and more to my software.
But, developers are generally lazy, so you could argue that this reason is
"compelling".
The other reason, is that I assume that "lower()" adds overhead, so makes
things slower than they need to be.
Whether that is true, and if that is a compelling reason, I don't know.
Honestly as a lazy DBA I have to say it'd be pretty easy to write a
script to convert any unique text index into a unique text index with
a upper() in it.
But changing the application to create queries with upper() in the
queries could be very hard. And without that, the function index
would be useless.

That objection doesn't apply to citext. I don't know what object to that is.

Cheers,

Jeff

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 17 of 17 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-general @
categoriespostgresql
postedJan 16, '13 at 6:50p
activeJan 21, '13 at 10:47p
posts17
users9
websitepostgresql.org
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase