Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Date
Msg-id 16214.1458615257@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Responses Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
List pgsql-bugs
Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:26 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If that is the case, I'd argue that's a glibc problem, not our
>>>> problem.  Of course, we could provide an option to disable abbreviated
>>>> keys for the benefit of people who need to work around buggy libc
>>>> implementations.

FWIW, I do not think you can dismiss it as "not our bug" if a large
fraction of existing glibc installations share the issue.  It might
be a glibc bug, but we'll have to find a workaround.

> Maybe we can write a test-case that lets check_strxfrm_bug() detect
> this issue, which would be ideal. But, again, I need to see what's
> going on with strxfrm() on affected systems before I can do anything.

Happy to test if you can provide a test case.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)