Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:05:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think this probably means we need to change chr() to reject code points
>> above 10ffff. Should we back-patch that, or just do it in HEAD?
> The compatibility risks resemble those associated with the fixes for bug
> #9210, so I recommend HEAD only:
> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20140220043940.GA3064539@tornado.leadboat.com
While I'd be willing to ignore that risk so far as code points above
10ffff go, if we want pg_utf8_islegal to be happy then we will also
have to reject surrogate-pair code points. It's not beyond the realm
of possibility that somebody is intentionally generating such code
points with chr(), despite the dump/reload hazard. So now I agree
that this is sounding more like a major-version-only behavioral change.
regards, tom lane
