Re: [HACKERS] ordering RH6.1

On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> Wow. Same data files, same binaries, different results. Sure looks
> like the finger is pointing at 6.1's libc. (I'm assuming that the
> binaries make use of a shared-library libc, not statically-linked-in
> routines, right?)

Right.

> Your regression failures show collation problems in all three of bpchar,
> varchar, and name. (But curiously, not for text ... hmm ...). bpchar
> and varchar both use varstr_cmp(), but namelt just calls strncmp
> unconditionally --- see adt/name.c. So the evidence is looking very
> strong that strncmp has got some kind of problem on RH 6.1.

More information: the LOCALE enabled-binaries act the same way. So, there's an
issue with both strcoll and strncmp. What gets me is that it works perfectly
fine on my RedHat 6.1 box that was upgraded from RedHat 6.0 -- but it does not
work fine at all on a box that I did a fresh install on today -- from the same
CD I did the upgrade.

Hmmm....

--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

>
> regards, tom lane