Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0
Date: 2025-03-18 15:53:56
Message-ID: f3ecc503b9ecbaf9b0c0315ee0218055458f56a5.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 2025-03-15 at 10:14 -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
> In the long term I think we should figure out how to support newer
> versions of unicode for the builtin, but in my mind that might
> involve
> the necessity of supporting multiple versions of unicode such that
> the
> choice remains to remain on the older one.

What do you think of Tom's argument that waiting to update Unicode is
what creates the problem in the first place?

"by then they might well have instances of the newly-assigned code
points in their database"[1]

Regards,
Jeff Davis

[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3481161.1742055336@sss.pgh.pa.us

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-03-18 16:01:43 pgsql: aio: Infrastructure for io_method=worker
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-03-18 15:51:43 Re: optimize file transfer in pg_upgrade