Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u4KvX-000qmk-Ls for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:36:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u4KvV-001Jt9-6n for pgsql-general@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:36:46 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1u4KvU-001Jt1-S8 for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:36:45 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1u4KvS-0002rG-1Y for pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:36:45 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 53EEaeAw1257279; Mon, 14 Apr 2025 10:36:40 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Laurenz Albe cc: Thomas Michael Engelke , pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: ICU Collations and Collation Updates In-reply-to: References: <8ed41c50ba6c5322296b869e497c1b5573853b54.camel@posteo.de> Comments: In-reply-to Laurenz Albe message dated "Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:05:01 +0200" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1257277.1744641400.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 10:36:40 -0400 Message-ID: <1257278.1744641400@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Laurenz Albe writes: > On Mon, 2025-04-14 at 08:28 +0000, Thomas Michael Engelke wrote: >> Is my understanding correct then in that this way the database >> collations never change, unless a manual intervention reinitialises the >> collations and reindexes the database (or appropriate indexes)? How >> does that process compare to other RDBMS? > When you update the C library or ICU library and the version changes, > you get warned by PostgreSQL and have to rebuild indexes. > So the collations can change whenever you update the respective libraries. > You would have to build PostgreSQL yourself with a fixed version of ICU > that you never upgrade if you want to avoid the problem. Yeah. AIUI there are two things that ICU does better than libc here: 1. ICU has a fairly well-defined scheme for identifying collation versions, glibc not so much. So the collation-changed warnings that Laurenz mentions are a lot more trustworthy for ICU collations. 2. It's at least *possible* to use your own fixed-version ICU library if you're desperate enough. I don't think that would work too well for libc; you're stuck with what the platform provides. regards, tom lane