Re: CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CREATE COLLATION does not sanitize ICU's BCP 47 language tags. Should it?
Date: 2017-09-19 21:32:32
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=i7Am9aU18z-aSkL770Ou8HpcHxQ8OXWR+fZ3Dgj=aXw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> writes:
>> Hm, I like the idea but I see some issues.
>
>> Enforcing the BCP47 seems like a good thing to me. I do not see any
>> reason to allow input with syntax errors. The issue though is that we do
>> not want to break people's databases when they upgrade to PostgreSQL 11.
>> What if they have specified the locale in the old non-ICU format or they
>> have a bogus value and we then error out on pg_upgrade or pg_restore?
>
> Well, if PG10 shipped with that restriction in place then it wouldn't
> be an issue ;-)

I was proposing that this be treated as an open item for v10; sorry if
I was unclear on that. Much like the "ICU locales vs. ICU collations
within pg_collation" issue, this seems like the kind of thing that we
ought to go out of our way to get right in the *first* version.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-09-19 21:34:21 Re: Re: issue: record or row variable cannot be part of multiple-item INTO list
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-09-19 21:25:31 Re: Show backtrace when tap tests fail