Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9a36d736cf807d9744916865f122ab9c863b3c2d.camel@j-davis.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2024-07-23 at 15:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > No, I think we *are* winning, because the updates are not "equally > unstable": with pg_c_utf8, we control when changes happen. We can > align them with major releases and release-note the differences. > With libc-based collations, we have zero control and not much > notification. Also, changes to libc collations are much more impactful, at least two orders of magnitude. All indexes on text are at risk, even primary keys. PG_C_UTF8 has stable code point ordering (memcmp()) that is unaffected by Unicode updates, so primary keys will never be affected. The risks we are talking about are for expression indexes, e.g. on LOWER(). Even if you do have such expression indexes, the types of changes Unicode makes to casing and character properties are typically much more mild. Regards, Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: