Re: ICU integration

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:35:34PM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Stable operating systems shouldn't do major library upgrades, so I feel
> > pretty confident about this.
>
> There is one case where it *is* appropriate for a bugfix release of
> ICU to bump collator version: When there was a bug in the collator
> itself, leading to broken binary blobs [1]. We should make the user
> REINDEX when this happens.
>
> I think that ICU may well do this in point releases, which is actually
> a good thing. So, it seems like a good idea to test that there is no
> change, in a place like check_strxfrm_bug(). In my opinion, we should
> LOG a complaint in the event of a mismatch rather than refusing to
> start the server, since there probably isn't that much chance of the
> user being harmed by the bug. The cost of not starting the server
> properly until a REINDEX finishes or similar looks particularly
> unappealing when one considers that the app was probably affected by
> any corruption for weeks or months before the ICU update enabled its
> detection.
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

I can't think of any cases where we warn of possible corruption only in
the server logs.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +