aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/backend/parser/parse_collate.c
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAge
* Update copyrights for 2013Bruce Momjian2013-01-01
| | | | | Fully update git head, and update back branches in ./COPYRIGHT and legal.sgml files.
* Lots of doc corrections.Robert Haas2012-04-23
| | | | Josh Kupershmidt
* Update copyright notices for year 2012.Bruce Momjian2012-01-01
|
* pgindent run before PG 9.1 beta 1.Bruce Momjian2011-04-10
|
* Adjust collation determination rules as per discussion.Tom Lane2011-04-09
| | | | | | | | | | | | Remove crude hack that tried to propagate collation through a function-returning-record, ie, from the function's arguments to individual fields selected from its result record. That is just plain inconsistent, because the function result is composite and cannot have a collation; and there's no hope of making this kind of action-at-a-distance work consistently. Adjust regression test cases that expected this to happen. Meanwhile, the behavior of casting to a domain with a declared collation stays the same as it was, since that seemed to be the consensus.
* Throw error for indeterminate collation of an ORDER/GROUP/DISTINCT target.Tom Lane2011-03-22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This restores a parse error that was thrown (though only in the ORDER BY case) by the original collation patch. I had removed it in my recent revisions because it was thrown at a place where collations now haven't been computed yet; but I thought of another way to handle it. Throwing the error at parse time, rather than leaving it to be done at runtime, is good because a syntax error pointer is helpful for localizing the problem. We can reasonably assume that the comparison function for a collatable datatype will complain if it doesn't have a collation to use. Now the planner might choose to implement GROUP or DISTINCT via hashing, in which case no runtime error would actually occur, but it seems better to throw error consistently rather than let the error depend on what the planner chooses to do. Another possible objection is that the user might specify a nondefault sort operator that doesn't care about collation ... but that's surely an uncommon usage, and it wouldn't hurt him to throw in a COLLATE clause anyway. This change also makes the ORDER BY/GROUP BY/DISTINCT case more consistent with the UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT case, which was already coded to throw this error even though the same objections could be raised there.
* Revise collation derivation method and expression-tree representation.Tom Lane2011-03-19
All expression nodes now have an explicit output-collation field, unless they are known to only return a noncollatable data type (such as boolean or record). Also, nodes that can invoke collation-aware functions store a separate field that is the collation value to pass to the function. This avoids confusion that arises when a function has collatable inputs and noncollatable output type, or vice versa. Also, replace the parser's on-the-fly collation assignment method with a post-pass over the completed expression tree. This allows us to use a more complex (and hopefully more nearly spec-compliant) assignment rule without paying for it in extra storage in every expression node. Fix assorted bugs in the planner's handling of collations by making collation one of the defining properties of an EquivalenceClass and by converting CollateExprs into discardable RelabelType nodes during expression preprocessing.