| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Guo, Adam" <adamguo(at)amazon(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_trgm comparison bug on cross-architecture replication due to different char implementation |
| Date: | 2024-04-30 07:38:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoA7ic0YR_WLOkGgnAG1=+WdGGPDcNWGTmsMm8rsTvG3tQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 12:37 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 11:57 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Reject as not a bug. Discourage people from thinking that physical
> >> replication will work across architectures.
>
> > While cross-arch physical replication is not supported, I think having
> > architecture dependent differences is not good and It's legitimate to
> > fix it. FYI the 'char' data type comparison is done as though char is
> > unsigned. I've attached a small patch to fix it. What do you think?
>
> I think this will break existing indexes that are working fine.
> Yeah, it would have been better to avoid the difference, but
> it's too late now.
True. So it will be a PG18 item.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Steele | 2024-04-30 08:35:46 | Re: CREATE TABLE/ProcessUtility hook behavior change |
| Previous Message | Maksim Milyutin | 2024-04-30 06:59:07 | Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache |