| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [v9.2] make_greater_string() does not return a string in some cases |
| Date: | 2011-10-23 02:16:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmobhk5mWdoSjZFZ+qU_Z5tN2Gd8EVCBoraYydwXd3PtLpw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
<horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> This must be the basis of the behavior of pg_utf8_verifier(), and
> pg_utf8_increment() has taken over it. It may be good to describe
> this origin of the special handling as comment of these functions
> to avoid this sort of confusion.
Oh, you know what? I'm misreading this code. *facepalm*
I thought that code was looking for 0xED/0xF4 in the second position,
but it's actually looking for them in the first position, which makes
vastly more sense. Whee!
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Clovis Vieira Jr. | 2011-10-23 13:31:19 | BUG #6265: Installation failure at the very beginning |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-22 16:13:45 | Re: 'pg_ctl restart' confused about pathname to postgresql.conf |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-23 03:14:48 | Re: So, is COUNT(*) fast now? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-10-23 02:15:00 | Re: synchronized snapshots |