Re: Locale implementation questions

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, kleptog(at)svana(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Locale implementation questions
Date: 2005-09-04 23:19:38
Message-ID: 9440.1125875978@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I think it's sheer madness to try to reproduce large swaths of the OS
> inside Postgres because you're unhappy with the quality of the OS
> implementation. You should be asking yourself why OS vendors have such
> a hard time getting this stuff right

In the case of the *BSDs, it's pretty obviously because they don't care.

> and why would Postgres do any better

In the first place, we do care, and in the second place, having to deal
with only one set of locale bugs would in itself be a huge advance over
where we are now.

We went over to maintaining our own timezone code for more or less the
same reasons, and in hindsight that was obviously the right decision.
Locale support is a bigger chunk, no doubt about it, but we also have
a lot of motivation.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-09-04 23:29:10 Re: Question about explain of index scan
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-09-04 23:15:21 Re: Proof of concept COLLATE support with patch