Horton

Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0

Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-04-03T10:20:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 17.03.25 19:54, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-03-13 at 14:49 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think these test result changes are incorrect.  AFAICT, nothing has
>> changed in the upstream data that would explain such a change.
>>
>> I didn't get such test differences in my original patch.  Did you
>> rebase
>> the patch or regenerate it?  Maybe something went wrong there.
> 
> Right. The previous version was improperly rebased.
> 
> I went back to your original version and rebased over master (including
> the latest optimizations for case mapping), and then rebased my changes
> on top of that. Attached.
> 
> One annoyance with the recent case mapping optimizations is that the
> Unicode update diff is larger, similar to the diff for
> unicode_norm_hashfunc.h. Previously, it was binary search, so the only
> differences were logical differences.

I have committed the update to the Unicode tables.  I suggest you commit 
your pg_upgrade patch on top of that now.

Commits

  1. pg_upgrade: Fix memory leak in check_for_unicode_update().

  2. pg_upgrade check for Unicode-dependent relations.

  3. Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0