public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
To: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Change initdb default to the builtin collation provider
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 17:23:22 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>

On 11.10.25 02:48, Jeff Davis wrote:
> The builtin provider uses code point order, i.e. memcmp(), so the
> final result display order is less human-friendly. For instance, 'Z'
> comes before 'a'.
> 
> That problem is annoying, but*much* easier to fix than the other
> factors. The user might add a COLLATE clause to the final ORDER BY, or
> perform the sort in the application layer or presentation layer.

I remain violently opposed to this idea.  I don't understand how it 
could be acceptable to just not provide a good display order by default 
and have everyone rewrite their queries.

> ICU is better than libc in a lot of ways:
> 
> * Better performance
> * Platform-independent
> * Easier to manage it as a separate library
> 
> But fundamentally, I don't think it's a great default, because it
> favors final result display order at the risk of primary key
> inconsistencies.

I don't understand.  We have a versioning system for ICU collations? 
Does it not work?

view thread (16+ messages)  latest in thread

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: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Change initdb default to the builtin collation provider
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

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

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