Re: [HACKERS] Can ICU be used for a database's default sort order? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Can ICU be used for a database's default sort order?
Date
Msg-id 20181002063220.GD11712@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Can ICU be used for a database's default sort order?  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Can ICU be used for a database's default sort order?  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 01:06:12PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> The ideal scope would be to track all referenced collation versions on
> every index, and only update them at CREATE INDEX or REINDEX time
> (also, as discussed in some other thread, CHECK constraints and
> partition keys might be invalidated and should in theory also carry
> versions that can only be updated by running a hypothetical RECHECK or
> REPARTITION command).  Then a shared pg_collation catalog would make
> perfect sense, and there would be no need for it to have a collversion
> column at all, or an ALTER COLLATION ... REFRESH VERSION command, and
> therefore there would be no way to screw it up by REFRESHing the
> VERSION without having really fixed the problem.

Please note that the latest patch set does not apply, so this has been
switched to commit fest 2018-11, waiting on author for a rebase.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreignservers, take 2
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add support for ON UPDATE/DELETE actions on ALTERCONSTRAINT