| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: check_strxfrm_bug() |
| Date: | 2023-04-20 01:34:44 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGJrdk12oxMZgbdQt_Ca7gp_mWEPXzwQ6B97BBv=tfTsXQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 2:31 PM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> To be clear, is the proposal to remove both "check_strxfrm_bug" and
> "TRUST_STRXFRM"?
>
> Given a bunch of folks who have expertise in this area of code all agree
> with removing the above as part of the collation cleanups targeted for
> v16, I'm inclined to agree. I don't really see the need for an explicit
> RMT action, but based on the consensus this seems OK to add as an open item.
Thanks all. I went ahead and removed check_strxfrm_bug().
I could write a patch to remove the libc strxfrm support, but since
Jeff recently wrote new code in 16 to abstract that stuff, he might
prefer to look at it?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jacktby@gmail.com | 2023-04-20 01:40:32 | Howdoes; pg; index; page; optimize; dead; tuples?; |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-04-20 01:13:04 | Re: Remove io prefix from pg_stat_io columns |