pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX backend filtering
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 11:58:28 -0700
Message-ID: <79A045F4-17DF-4975-ABF4-9F40171E740D@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E911A80F-3CFB-4B94-8CBD-FFA0E6DA4FC1@enterprisedb.com>
References: <YE6ikDiXyA0w19UI@paquier.xyz>
	<20210315003551.enuwfghdh7qhfnb2@nol>
	<20210315033320.4273frstqn7w6kh7@nol>
	<0E0B73C0-EBC0-490A-9347-66A66E3338AE@enterprisedb.com>
	<20210315165213.tgxwtjtnlnr2q3f5@nol>
	<074D5DFD-4D47-4A84-93A5-C2DC8935E6E9@enterprisedb.com>
	<20210315173401.yqgxgmbspiyfrbks@nol>
	<9AC710C9-7006-43EC-93F6-7A7ABFE09E80@enterprisedb.com>
	<20210315175044.txxhycqg7iaa66qy@nol>
	<F2282C75-D06D-4F9B-8AAD-66F206760B24@enterprisedb.com>
	<20210315181037.nlw7ghqqtngqdm2r@nol>
	<E911A80F-3CFB-4B94-8CBD-FFA0E6DA4FC1@enterprisedb.com>



> On Mar 15, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> 
> If you had a real, not fake, collation provider which actually provided a collation with an actual version number, stopped the server, changed the behavior of the collation as well as its version number, started the server, and ran REINDEX (OUTDATED), I think that would be a more real-world test.  I'm not demanding that you write such a test.  I'm just saying that it is strange that we don't have coverage for this anywhere, and was asking if you think there is such coverage, because, you know, maybe I just didn't see where that test was lurking.

I should add some context regarding why I mentioned this issue at all.

Not long ago, if an upgrade of icu or libc broke your collations, you were sad.  But postgres didn't claim to be competent to deal with this problem, so it was just a missing feature.  Now, with REINDEX (OUTDATED), we're really implying, if not outright saying, that postgres knows how to deal with collation upgrades.  I feel uncomfortable that v14 will make such a claim with not a single regression test confirming such a claim.  I'm happy to discover that such a test is lurking somewhere and I just didn't see it.

—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company








view thread (40+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <79A045F4-17DF-4975-ABF4-9F40171E740D@enterprisedb.com>
Permalink:  ../79A045F4-17DF-4975-ABF4-9F40171E740D@enterprisedb.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/79A045F4-17DF-4975-ABF4-9F40171E740D@enterprisedb.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com, rjuju123@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, magnus@hagander.net, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
  Subject: Re: REINDEX backend filtering
  In-Reply-To: <79A045F4-17DF-4975-ABF4-9F40171E740D@enterprisedb.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox