Horton

Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Jeremy Schneider <schneider@ardentperf.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-03-18T18:58:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 2:55 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> Continuing on with Unicode 15.1 and accepting the unassigned code point
> *cannot* prevent breakage.

Under your definition, this is true, but I think Jeremy would define
breakage differently. His primary concern, I expect, is *stability*.
Breakage means that the same supposedly-stable results return
different answers on the same data. Under that definition, continuing
under Unicode 15.1 does prevent breakage.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

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