| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, 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 20:39:23 |
| Message-ID: | 1086455.1721767163@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Daniel Verite" <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 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.
> pg_collation.collversion has been used so far for the sort part
> of the collations.
Hmm, we haven't particularly drawn a distinction between sort-related
and not-sort-related aspects of collation versions AFAIK. Perhaps
it'd be appropriate to do so, and I agree that there's not time to
design such a thing for v17. But pg_c_utf8 might be the only case
where we could do anything other than advance those versions in
lockstep. I doubt we have enough insight into the behaviors of
other providers to say confidently that an update affects only
one side of their behavior.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2024-07-23 20:43:18 | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-07-23 20:36:12 | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |