Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Magnus Hagander
Тема Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Дата
Msg-id CABUevEyk3Z1mQV=Zi-kt6gONCOw7sOKrim+XP+KMEao4rJ0Wcw@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Ответы Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Список pgsql-bugs
On Mar 23, 2016 18:53, "Peter Geoghegan" <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > If I had to make a recommendation right now, I would go for your
> > option #4, ie shut 'em all down Scotty.  We do not know the full extent
> > of the problem but it looks pretty bad, and I think our first priority
> > has to be to guarantee data integrity.
>
> +1, but only for glibc, and configurable. The glibc default might
> later be revisited in the stable 9.5 branch.
>

Are you talking about  configurable at./configure time, or guc?

Making it a compile time option makes sense I think. But turning it into a
guc will expose users to a lot of failure scenarios if they *change* the
value, and that seems risky.

Putting it in autoconf and default to off in the upcoming minor seems like
a good idea. Then once we have more information, we can consider if we want
to turn it back on in backbranches our just in 9.6 (when/if properly
fixed).

/Magnus

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: Missing rows with index scan when collation is not "C" (PostgreSQL 9.5)