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

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Date
Msg-id CAEepm=15dU8Vn3VomQoCtX0Jcp0f=+zoG3sR+_cdkucLCh+G2A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
List pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.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.
>
> Indeed.  To try to put some scope on the problem, I made an idiot little
> program that just generates some random UTF8 strings and sees whether
> strcoll and strxfrm sort them alike.  Attached are that program, a even
> more idiot little shell script that runs it over all available UTF8
> locales, and the results on my RHEL6 box.  While de_DE seems to be the
> worst-broken locale, it's far from the only one.
>
> Please try this on as many platforms as you can get hold of ...

Failed on Debian 8.2, but only for de_DE.utf8.  libc 2.19-18+deb8u1.  Attached.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-bugs by date:

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