| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Marc-Olaf Jaschke <marc-olaf(dot)jaschke(at)s24(dot)com>, Postgres-Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Date: | 2016-03-22 23:59:01 |
| Message-ID: | 21201.1458691141@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> We are, however, putting indexes on disk whose ordering was determined
> partly by the result of strxfrm() comparisons.
Yeah. It appears to me that the originally-submitted test case creates
an index whose entries are ordered correctly according to strxfrm(),
but not so much according to strcoll().
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-23 00:05:19 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-03-22 23:58:29 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-23 00:05:19 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-03-22 23:58:29 | Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5) |