Re: Collation versioning

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Douglas Doole <dougdoole(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Collation versioning
Date: 2020-09-10 16:53:14
Message-ID: da128862-31c8-5bf0-30d0-9dac6332c3b1@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2020-09-08 21:33, Christoph Berg wrote:
> IOW, I think we should aim at simply tracking the version, and leave
> it to the admin (with the help of supplied SQL queries) to either
> rebuild indexes or waive them.

It's certainly safer to track dependency for all indexes and then
carefully create exceptions afterwards.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-09-10 16:56:55 Re: SIGQUIT handling, redux
Previous Message Fujii Masao 2020-09-10 16:40:59 Re: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size