On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > On Friday, May 06, 2011 04:30:01 AM Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > In my opinion this is actually a bug in < 9.0. As its a (imo) low impact >> > fix thats constrained to two files it seems sensible to backpatch it now >> > that the solution has proven itself in the field? >> > The issue is hard to find and has come up several times in the field. And >> > it has been slightly embarassing more than once ;) >> Can you share some more details about your experiences? > About the embarassing or hard to find part? > > One of the hard to find part parts involved a search (constraining word order > after a tsearch search) where slightly fewer than usual search results were > returned in production. > Nobody had noticed during testing that case insensitive search worked for most > things except multibyte chars as the tested case was something like: SELECT > 'ÖFFENTLICHKEIT' ~* 'Öffentlichkeit' and the regex condition was only relevant > when searching for multiple words. > > One of the emarassing examples was that I suggested moving away from a > solution using several ILIKE rules to one case insenitive regular expression. > Totally forgetting that I knew that this was only fixed in 9.0. This turned > out > to be faster. And it turned out to be wrong. In production :-(. > > > Both sum up that the problem is often not noticed as most of the people > realizing that that case could be a problem don't have a knowledge of the > content and don't notice the problem until later...
After mulling this over a bit more, I guess I''m a little skeptical of back-patching this because it is clearly a behavior change. It seems unlikely, but not impossible, that someone is relying on the current behavior, and changing it in a minor release might be considered unfriendly. On the flip side, the risk of it flat-out blowing up seems pretty small. For someone to invent their own version of wchar_t that uses something other than Unicode code points would be pretty much pure masochism, wouldn't it? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
