Re: pg_trgm comparison bug on cross-architecture replication due to different char implementation

On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 03:48:53PM -0500, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 6:46 AM Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> > If I were standardizing pg_trgm on one or the other notion of "char", I would
> > choose signed char, since I think it's still the majority.  More broadly, I
> > see these options to fix pg_trgm:
> >
> > 1. Change to signed char.  Every arm64 system needs to scan pg_trgm indexes.
> > 2. Change to unsigned char.  Every x86 system needs to scan pg_trgm indexes.
> 
> Even though it's true that signed char systems are the majority, it
> would not be acceptable to force the need to scan pg_trgm indexes on
> unsigned char systems.
> 
> > 3. Offer both, as an upgrade path.  For example, pg_trgm could have separate
> >    operator classes gin_trgm_ops and gin_trgm_ops_unsigned.  Running
> >    pg_upgrade on an unsigned-char system would automatically map v17
> >    gin_trgm_ops to v18 gin_trgm_ops_unsigned.  This avoids penalizing any
> >    architecture with upgrade-time scans.
> 
> Very interesting idea. How can new v18 users use the correct operator
> class? I don't want to require users to specify the correct signed or
> unsigned operator classes when creating a GIN index. Maybe we need to

In brief, it wouldn't matter which operator class new v18 indexes use.  The
documentation would focus on gin_trgm_ops and also say something like:

  There's an additional operator class, gin_trgm_ops_unsigned.  It behaves
  exactly like gin_trgm_ops, but it uses a deprecated on-disk representation.
  Use gin_trgm_ops in new indexes, but there's no disadvantage from continuing
  to use gin_trgm_ops_unsigned.  Before PostgreSQL 18, gin_trgm_ops used a
  platform-dependent representation.  pg_upgrade automatically uses
  gin_trgm_ops_unsigned when upgrading from source data that used the
  deprecated representation.

What concerns might users have, then?  (Neither operator class would use plain
"char" in a context that affects on-disk state.  They'll use "signed char" and
"unsigned char".)

> dynamically use the correct compare function for the same operator
> class depending on the char signedness. But is it possible to do it on
> the extension (e.g. pg_trgm) side?

No, I don't think the extension can do that cleanly.  It would need to store
the signedness in the index somehow, and GIN doesn't call the opclass at a
time facilitating that.  That would need help from the core server.