Re: Should AT TIME ZONE be volatile?
| От | Isaac Morland |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Should AT TIME ZONE be volatile? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMsGm5eP5wu7qvwa7kBOj-rqX4bxoksecwb09RadFu2sYpuZiQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Should AT TIME ZONE be volatile? (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Should AT TIME ZONE be volatile?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 at 16:08, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 3:45 PM Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is however one kind of change at least that I think can be made safely: adding a new character in between existing characters. That shouldn't affect any existing indexes.
Only if you can guarantee that said character is not present already.
I don't think we update the end of the acceptable code point range
every time that Unicode adds new stuff, so probably those things are
subject to some default rule unless and until someone installs
something more specific. Therefore I doubt that even this case is
truly safe.
Wouldn't an existing index only have characters that were already part of the collation? Attempting to use one not covered by the collation I would have expected to cause an error at insert time. But definitely I agree I wouldn't feel confident about the safety of any change.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: