Re: [BUGS] Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE andwork_mem values
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [BUGS] Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE andwork_mem values |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-Wz=XCA27uKT5MXUcysnqmE2nSdFO0HK+HyAc7UXyfkEkVA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [BUGS] Crash report for some ICU-52 (debian8) COLLATE and work_mem values (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I'm quite disturbed though that the set of installed collations on these > two test cases seem to be entirely different both from each other and from > what you reported. The base collations look generally similar, but the > "keyword variant" versions are not comparable at all. Considering that > the entire reason we are interested in ICU in the first place is its > alleged cross-version collation behavior stability, this gives me the > exact opposite of a warm fuzzy feeling. We need to understand why it's > like that and what we can do to reduce the variation, or else we're just > buying our users enormous future pain. At least with the libc collations, > you can expect that if you have en_US.utf8 available today you will > probably still have en_US.utf8 available tomorrow. I am not seeing any > reason to believe that the same holds for ICU collations. +1. That seems like something that is important to get right up-front. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: