> From: Scott Marlowe
> To: Glyn Astill
> Cc: Björn Lundin ; "pgsql-general@postgresql.org"
>
> Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2015, 13:23
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] unexpected (to me) sorting order
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Glyn Astill
> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Glyn Astill wrote:
>
>> From: Björn Lundin
>>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>>Sent: Wednesday, 8 April 2015, 10:09
>>Subject: [GENERAL] unexpected (to me) sorting order
>>
>>select * from T_SORT order by NA
On 2015-04-08 13:10, Glyn Astill wrote:
>> From: Chris Mair
>
>
>
> I think this is down to behaviour changes in glibc, there was a thread a
> while ago where somebody replicating via streaming rep between with different
> versions of glibc ended up in a bit of a pickle.
>
> http://www.postg
> From: Chris Mair
> To: Björn Lundin ; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, 8 April 2015, 10:36
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] unexpected (to me) sorting order
>
>
>> select * from T_SORT order by NAME ;
>>
&g
On Wed, 08 Apr 2015 11:36:01 +0200
Chris Mair wrote:
> PostreSQL relies on the OS's C lib. So this kind
> of ordering problems depend on the OS' idea about
> collations.
>
> I don't know what's the rationale behin this,
> but it looks like Linux ignores the . when doing the sort.
Not only '.'.
On 2015-04-08 11:36, Chris Mair wrote:
>
> I don't know what's the rationale behin this,
> but it looks like Linux ignores the . when doing the sort.
>
Yes, I see that now,
and it makes sense
Thanks.
--
Björn
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make chang
On 2015-04-08 11:33, Glyn Astill wrote:
> The collation of your "bnl" database is utf8, so the "." punctuation
> character is seen as a "variable element" and given a lower weighting in
> the sort to the rest of the characters. That's just how the collate
algorithm works in UTF8.
> Try with LC_C
> select * from T_SORT order by NAME ;
>
> rollback;
> id |name
> +
> 1 | FINISH_110_150_1
> 2 | FINISH_110_200_1
> 3 | FINISH_1.10_20.0_3
> 4 | FINISH_1.10_20.0_4
> 5 | FINISH_1.10_30.0_3
> 6 | FINISH_1.10_30.0_4
> 7 | FINISH_120_150_1
> 8 | FINIS
> From: Björn Lundin
>To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>Sent: Wednesday, 8 April 2015, 10:09
>Subject: [GENERAL] unexpected (to me) sorting order
>
>
>
>Hi!
>below are some commands to
>replicate a strange sorting order.
>
>I do not see why id:s 3-6
Hi!
below are some commands to
replicate a strange sorting order.
I do not see why id:s 3-6 are in the middle of the result set.
What am I missing?
begin;
create table T_SORT (
ID bigint default 1 not null , -- Primary Key
NAME varchar(100) default ' ' not null
);
alter table T_SORT add cons
10 matches
Mail list logo
