Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Michael Paesold <mpaesold(at)gmx(dot)at>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug)
Date: 2006-01-09 21:23:35
Message-ID: 8336.1136841815@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We could just file a Perl bug report and wait for them to fix it.

> What's the data risk?

Given that it took us this long to identify the problem, I'm guessing
that it doesn't affect too many people. For starters you'd have to
run the postmaster under a locale environment different from what
initdb saw (or was told).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2006-01-09 22:38:35 Re: lookup_rowtype_tupdesc considered harmful
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-01-09 20:29:52 Re: plperl vs LC_COLLATE (was Re: Possible savepoint bug)