Re: PITR Recovery and out-of-sync indexes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Brian Wipf <brian(at)clickspace(dot)com>
Cc: Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PITR Recovery and out-of-sync indexes
Date: 2007-10-03 18:32:08
Message-ID: 29475.1191436328@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Brian Wipf <brian(at)clickspace(dot)com> writes:
> PG tried to enforce the same LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE. On OS X, the
> value of en_US.utf8 didn't exist, so I created a soft link to
> en_US.UTF-8 in the /usr/share/locale/ directory. When I sort the
> values of product_id_from_source on both systems using the locales in
> this manner I get different orderings:

Hmph, hadn't remembered that, but indeed it seems that en_US sorting
is ASCII order, or nearly so, on Darwin. On Linux it's "dictionary
order", which means case-insensitive, spaces are second class citizens,
and some other strange rules.

Linux:

$ LANG=en_US.utf8 sort zzz
ZZ538264
zz barf
zzdangle
zz echo
ZZring
$

Darwin, same data:

$ LANG=en_US.UTF-8 sort zzz
ZZ538264
ZZring
zz barf
zz echo
zzdangle
$

> I can happily live with rebuilding indexes if this is the only
> problem I can expect to encounter, and I would still prefer PITR over
> replication.

The whole notion scares the daylights out of me. If you really need
to use PITR between these two particular platforms, use a locale
with common behavior --- C/POSIX would work.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-10-03 18:38:36 Re: PITR and Compressed WALS
Previous Message Jimmy Choi 2007-10-03 18:29:57 Unexpected behavior with CASE statement