Brian Wipf <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> PG tried to enforce the same LC_COLLATE and LC_CTYPE. On OS X, the
> value of en_US.utf8 didn't exist, so I created a soft link to
> en_US.UTF-8 in the /usr/share/locale/ directory. When I sort the
> values of product_id_from_source on both systems using the locales in
> this manner I get different orderings:
Hmph, hadn't remembered that, but indeed it seems that en_US sorting
is ASCII order, or nearly so, on Darwin. On Linux it's "dictionary
order", which means case-insensitive, spaces are second class citizens,
and some other strange rules.
Linux:
$ LANG=en_US.utf8 sort zzz
ZZ538264
zz barf
zzdangle
zz echo
ZZring
$
Darwin, same data:
$ LANG=en_US.UTF-8 sort zzz
ZZ538264
ZZring
zz barf
zz echo
zzdangle
$
> I can happily live with rebuilding indexes if this is the only
> problem I can expect to encounter, and I would still prefer PITR over
> replication.
The whole notion scares the daylights out of me. If you really need
to use PITR between these two particular platforms, use a locale
with common behavior --- C/POSIX would work.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
