| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |
| Date: | 2024-07-23 20:28:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1085347.1721766506@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 3:26 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Do we need to version the new ctype provider?
>> It would be a version for the underlying Unicode definitions,
>> not the provider as such, but perhaps yes. I don't know to what
>> extent doing so would satisfy Noah's concern; but if it would do
>> so I'd be happy with that answer.
> I don't see how we can get by without some kind of versioning here.
> It's probably too late to do that for v17,
Why? If we agree that that's the way forward, we could certainly
stick some collversion other than "1" into pg_c_utf8's pg_collation
entry. There's already been one v17 catversion bump since beta2
(716bd12d2), so another one is basically free.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Verite | 2024-07-23 20:34:00 | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-07-23 20:18:59 | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |