Re: BUG #1082: Order by doesn't sort correctly.

From: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Richard Neill <rn214(at)hermes(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk>, rn214(at)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk, PostgreSQL Bugs List <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #1082: Order by doesn't sort correctly.
Date: 2004-02-24 13:17:21
Message-ID: 403B4EE1.3040607@pse-consulting.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tom Lane wrote:

>Richard Neill <rn214(at)hermes(dot)cam(dot)ac(dot)uk> writes:
>
>
>>This ordering is perverse!
>>
>>
>
>No kidding.
>
>
>
>>No matter what the priority is of the
>>different characters, I cannot understand how the above can arise.
>>
>>
>
>You are assuming that it's a byte-at-a-time process. It's not. I
>believe the first pass considers only letters and digits.
>
>You can easily prove to yourself that it's not just Postgres. Here's
>an example on my Linux laptop:
>
>[tgl(at)g3 tgl]$ cat zzz
>Cymbal #1
>Cymbal - 18 inch
>Cymbal #2
>[tgl(at)g3 tgl]$ LC_ALL=C sort zzz
>Cymbal #1
>Cymbal #2
>Cymbal - 18 inch
>[tgl(at)g3 tgl]$ LC_ALL=en_GB sort zzz
>Cymbal #1
>Cymbal - 18 inch
>Cymbal #2
>[tgl(at)g3 tgl]$
>
>
I verified this, and it's not GB specific as one might suggest... Same
with en_US, de_DE, fr_FR, af_ZA. Does this behaviour really make sense
to anybody?

Regards,
Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Devrim GUNDUZ 2004-02-24 13:25:46 Re: BUG #1082: Order by doesn't sort correctly.
Previous Message Martin Langhoff 2004-02-24 10:47:48 Re: BUG #1083: Insert query reordering interacts badly with