Re: pg_collation.collversion for C.UTF-8

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_collation.collversion for C.UTF-8
Date: 2023-06-06 19:23:30
Message-ID: 71fc8af0d9324a08dd7854b2162ae4265a98d837.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2023-06-05 at 19:43 +0200, Daniel Verite wrote:
> But in the meantime, personally I don't quite see why Postgres should
> start forcing C.UTF-8 to sort differently in the database than in the
> OS.

I can see both points of view. It could be surprising to users if
C.UTF-8 does not sort like C/memcmp, or surprising if it changes out
from under them. It could also be surprising that it wouldn't sort like
the current OS's libc interpretation of C.UTF-8.

What about ICU? How should provider=icu locale=C.UTF-8 behave? We
could:

a. Just pass it to the provider and see what happens (older versions of
ICU would interpret it as en-US-u-va-posix; newer versions would give
the root locale).

b. Consistently interpret it as en-US-u-va-posix.

c. Don't pass it to the provider at all and treat it with memcmp
semantics.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-06-06 19:25:26 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction
Previous Message Joe Conway 2023-06-06 19:21:25 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction