| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Finnerty, Jim" <jfinnert(at)amazon(dot)com>, "Nasby, Jim" <nasbyj(at)amazon(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Collation version tracking for macOS |
| Date: | 2022-06-14 18:10:44 |
| Message-ID: | b37c2acd-24f4-07c9-da6e-6fec66137f69@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11.06.22 05:35, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> Do we even need to store a version for indexes most of the time if
> we're versioning ICU itself, as part of the "time travelling
> collations" design? For that matter, do we even need to version
> collations directly anymore?
Conversely, why are we looking at the ICU version instead of the
collation version. If we have recorded the collation as being version
1234, we need to look through the available ICU versions (assuming we
can load multiple ones somehow) and pick the one that provides 1234. It
doesn't matter whether it's the same ICU version that the collation was
originally created with, as long as the collation version stays the same.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-06-14 18:14:44 | Re: better page-level checksums |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-06-14 18:10:34 | Re: better page-level checksums |