Re: Move defaults toward ICU in 16?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Move defaults toward ICU in 16?
Date: 2023-02-17 17:05:23
Message-ID: 20230217170523.ujnq3qr75rolfrmu@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2023-02-17 09:01:54 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-02-17 at 00:06 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-02-14 at 09:59 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I am saying that pg_upgrade should be able to deal with the
> > > difference. The
> > > details of how to implement that, don't matter that much.
> >
> > To clarify, you're saying that pg_upgrade should simply update
> > pg_database to set the new databases' collation fields equal to that
> > of
> > the old cluster?

Yes.

> Thinking about this more, it's not clear to me if this would be in
> scope for pg_upgrade or not.

I don't think we should consider changing the default collation provider
without making this more seamless, one way or another.

> If pg_upgrade is fixing up the new cluster rather than checking for
> compatibility, why doesn't it just take over and do the initdb for the new
> cluster itself? That would be less confusing for users, and avoid some
> weirdness (like, if you drop the database "postgres" on the original, why
> does it reappear after an upgrade?).

I've wondered about that as well. There are some initdb-time options you can
set, but pg_upgrade could forward those.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2023-02-17 17:27:13 Re: Move defaults toward ICU in 16?
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2023-02-17 17:01:54 Re: Move defaults toward ICU in 16?