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

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRn0Na7t1zJzg-FA_K3FRS77c9psjVNPMXc9631ZYr9Xg@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>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> writes:
>> I now think that we have this backwards: This isn't a bug in glibc's
>> strxfrm(); it's a bug in glibc's strcoll().
>
> FWIW, the test program I just posted includes checks to see if the two
> cases produce self-consistent sort orders.  So far I've seen no evidence
> that they don't; that is, strcoll() produces a consistent sort order,
> and strxfrm() produces a consistent sort order, but not the same one.
> That being the case, arguing about which one is wrong seems a bit
> academic, not to mention well above my pay grade so far as the theoretical
> behavior of locale-specific sort ordering is concerned.

I hope you're right about it being academic.

--
Peter Geoghegan

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)