| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthew Kelly <mkelly(at)tripadvisor(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Matthew Spilich <mspilich(at)tripadvisor(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Collations and Replication; Next Steps |
| Date: | 2014-09-18 04:10:40 |
| Message-ID: | 541A5B40.4050609@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/17/2014 09:17 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> What I find astonishing is that whoever maintains glibc (or the Red
> Hat packaging for it) thinks it's OK to change the collation order in
> a minor release. I'd understand changing it between, say, RHEL 6 and
> RHEL 7. But the idea that minor release, supposedly safe updates
> think they can whack this around without breaking applications really
> kind of blows my mind.
If confirmed, it certainly requires some ... firm ... bug reports.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2014-09-18 04:16:56 | Re: Collations and Replication; Next Steps |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2014-09-18 04:09:31 | Re: Collations and Replication; Next Steps |