Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Jeremy Schneider <schneider@ardentperf.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-01-21T07:46:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2025-01-20 at 17:06 -0800, Jeremy Schneider wrote: > On the user side, my main concerns are the same as they've always > been: 100% confidence that Postgres updates will not corrupt any data > or cause incorrect query results I'll add that, while 100% may be a good goal, it hasn't been the standard in the past. You're talking about a new standard of immutability starting in 18, and as Peter pointed out, I don't think Unicode updates are the only thing we need to consider. My personal opinion is that both positions -- to upgrade Unicode or not -- are a bit exaggerated. On the one hand, there's no urgency to updating Unicode; but on the other hand, there's not a huge danger, at least compared with our historical standards. Regards, Jeff Davis
Commits
-
pg_upgrade: Fix memory leak in check_for_unicode_update().
- de48056ec7d2 18.0 landed
-
pg_upgrade check for Unicode-dependent relations.
- b81ffa13e356 18.0 landed
-
Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0
- 82a46cca99fa 18.0 landed