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

  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