Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0
Date: 2024-11-19 21:42:20
Message-ID: 0e05b887fa556271fd7872c3dfc8b6da32b1518f.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2024-11-12 at 10:40 +0100, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> I want to reiterate what I said in the above thread:
> If that means that indexes on strings using the "builtin" collation
> provider need to be reindexed after an upgrade, I am very much
> against it.

How would you feel if there was a better way to "lock down" the
behavior using an extension?

I have a patchset here:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/78a1b434ff40510dc5aaabe986299a09f4da90cf.camel%40j-davis.com

that changes the implementation of collation and ctype to use method
tables rather than branching, and it also introduces some hooks that
can be used to replace the method tables with whatever you want.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2024-11-19 22:07:16 Re: Sample rate added to pg_stat_statements
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2024-11-19 21:36:08 Re: logical replication: restart_lsn can go backwards (and more), seems broken since 9.4