From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
Cc: Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org>
Cc: Jeremy Schneider <schneider@ardentperf.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Built-in CTYPE provider
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 08:50:41 -0700
Message-ID: <9bc08ca7687ecb2c37d04e5ccde76903848dd998.camel@j-davis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240718233908.52.nmisch@google.com>
References: <564325.1720297161@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20240709010545.8c.nmisch@google.com>
<39a30bd36198b44ed40da271ef96a72d133c32ba.camel@j-davis.com>
<20240711125040.11.nmisch@google.com>
<1908b19c0a3a210935608635cad1b4eeb819c66f.camel@j-davis.com>
<20240717220326.df.nmisch@google.com>
<4efae9f992f96a1e8eba0f515c637c3ff252d0fc.camel@cybertec.at>
<20240718140015.9b.nmisch@google.com>
<f29686018b4432a8ae2e535dbe19f0d88e7a79d5.camel@j-davis.com>
<3729436.1721322211@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20240718233908.52.nmisch@google.com>
On Thu, 2024-07-18 at 16:39 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> I'm with a different kind of packager. I don't tolerate index scans
> returning
> wrong answers.
I doubt that. We've all been tolerating the risk of index scans
returning wrong results in some cases.
Consider:
a. Some user creates an expression index on NORMALIZE(); vs.
b. Some user chooses the builtin "C.UTF-8" locale and creates a partial
index with a predicate like "string ~ '[[:alpha:]]'" (or an expression
index on LOWER())
Both cases create a risk if we update Unicode in some future version.
Why are you unconcerned about case (a), but highly concerned about case
(b)?
Neither seem to be a pressing problem because updating Unicode is our
choice, so we have time to reach a compromise.
> [1] Daniel Verite said packagers could patch src/Makefile.global.in
> and run
> "make -C src/common/unicode update-unicode". Editing
> src/Makefile.global.in
> is modifying PostgreSQL, not configuring a packager-facing option.
Then go to the other thread[1] and propose that it be exposed as a
packager-facing option along with any proposed Unicode update. There
are other potential compromises possible, so I don't think this 17
subthread is the right place to discuss it, but it strikes me as a
reasonable proposal.
I sincerely think you are overcomplicating matters with version 17
procedural motions. Let the community process play out in version 18
like normal, because there's no actual problem now, I see no reason
your objections would be taken less seriously later.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d75d2d0d1d2bd45b2c332c47e3e0a67f0640b49c.camel%40j-davis.com
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: pgsql@j-davis.com, noah@leadboat.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, peter@eisentraut.org, daniel@manitou-mail.org, schneider@ardentperf.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Built-in CTYPE provider
In-Reply-To: <9bc08ca7687ecb2c37d04e5ccde76903848dd998.camel@j-davis.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