Re: Bogus collation version recording in recordMultipleDependencies - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Julien Rouhaud
Subject Re: Bogus collation version recording in recordMultipleDependencies
Date
Msg-id 20210416155535.l2j3hcuc7qjn2hy6@nol
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bogus collation version recording in recordMultipleDependencies  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bogus collation version recording in recordMultipleDependencies  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 10:03:42AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Since the proposed patch removes the dependency code's special-case
> handling of the default collation, I don't feel like we need to jump
> through hoops to prove that the default collation is tracked the
> same as other collations.  A regression test with alternative outputs
> is a significant ongoing maintenance burden, and I do not see where
> we're getting a commensurate improvement in test coverage.  Especially
> since, AFAICS, the two alternative outputs would essentially have to
> accept both the "it works" and "it doesn't work" outcomes.

Fine by me, I was mentioning those if we wanted to keep some extra coverage for
that by I agree it doesn't add much value.

> So I propose that we do 0001 below, which is my first patch plus your
> suggestion about fixing up create_index.sql.  This passes check-world
> for me under both C and en_US.utf8 prevailing locales.

That's what I ended up with too, so LGTM!



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Japin Li
Date:
Subject: Re: Truncate in synchronous logical replication failed
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Iterating on IndexTuple attributes and nbtree page-level dynamic prefix truncation