On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 09:45:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 07:00:14PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Another idea would be to make a test during postmaster start to see > >> if this bug exists, and fail if so. I'm generally on board with the > >> thought that we don't need to work on systems with such a bad bug, > >> but it would be a good thing if the failure was clean and produced > >> a helpful error message, rather than looking like a Postgres bug. > > > Failing cleanly on unpatched Solaris is adequate, agreed. A check at > > postmaster start isn't enough, because the postmaster might run in the C > > locale while individual databases or collations use problem locales. The > > safest thing is to test after every setlocale(LC_COLLATE) and > > newlocale(LC_COLLATE). That's once at backend start and once per backend > > per > > collation used, more frequent than I would like. Hmm. > > I was thinking more along the lines of making a single test by momentarily > switching into a known-buggy locale.
It seems like every Solaris system I meet has a different set of installed locales. Any one I might pick could sometimes be unavailable when other buggy locales are available. On this Solaris 10 05/08 (10u5) system, the buggy and non-buggy locales have no clear pattern. While fr_FR.UTF-8 is fine, fr_LU.UTF-8 is buggy. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
