| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Marc-Olaf Jaschke <marc-olaf(dot)jaschke(at)s24(dot)com>, Postgres-Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Date: | 2016-03-22 23:51:15 |
| Message-ID: | 20828.1458690675@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I was a little worried that it was too much to hope for that all libc
>> vendors on earth would ship a strxfrm() implementation that was actually
>> consistent with strcoll(), and here we are.
BTW, the glibc discussion starting here:
https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2015-09/msg00196.html
should put substantial fear in us about the advisability of putting strxfrm
results on-disk, as I understand we're now doing in btrees.
I was led to that while looking to see if there were any already-filed
glibc bug reports concerning this issue. AFAICS there are not, which
is odd if the bug is gone in more recent releases ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-22 23:52:46 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-22 23:48:31 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-22 23:52:46 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Previous Message | Roma Sokolov | 2016-03-22 23:50:06 | Re: [PATCH] fix DROP OPERATOR to reset links to itself on commutator and negator |