Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 2015-02-25 12:08:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Gierth <and...@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes:
>>> So while helping someone with an unrelated issue, I did a quick query to
>>> look for collation-dependent indexes, and was rather shocked to find
>>> that not only are there two such in the system catalogs, both set to
>>> "default" collation, but that one of them is in a _shared_ catalog
>>> (pg_shseclabel).
>>> How did that happen? And how could it possibly work?
>> It probably doesn't, and the reason nobody has noticed is that the
>> security label stuff has fewer users than I have fingers (and those
>> people aren't using provider names that would cause anything interesting
>> to happen).
>>
>> The most obvious fix is to change "provider" to a NAME column.
> Yea. I'm not sure why that wasn't done initially.
OK, now I'm on the warpath, because I went to fix this and discovered
that since that discussion, somebody named Freund committed yet another
shared catalog with a collation-dependent index. This time, at least,
we can fix it *before* it gets into the wild.
Is it okay to change pg_replication_origin.roname to type "name",
and if not what do you want to do instead?
While I'm looking at it, why in the world have roident and not just a
standard system OID column? This catalog seems willfully ignorant of
Postgres conventions.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
