From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: collations in shared catalogs? |
Date: | 2015-02-25 17:08:32 |
Message-ID: | 28406.1424884112@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> So while helping someone with an unrelated issue, I did a quick query to
> look for collation-dependent indexes, and was rather shocked to find
> that not only are there two such in the system catalogs, both set to
> "default" collation, but that one of them is in a _shared_ catalog
> (pg_shseclabel).
> How did that happen? And how could it possibly work?
It probably doesn't, and the reason nobody has noticed is that the
security label stuff has fewer users than I have fingers (and those
people aren't using provider names that would cause anything interesting
to happen).
The most obvious fix is to change "provider" to a NAME column.
What was the other case? We might want to add a regression test to
check for collation-dependent system indexes ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-02-25 17:12:53 | Re: PostgreSQL on z/OS UNIX? |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-02-25 17:08:29 | Re: contrib/fuzzystrmatch/dmetaphone.c license |