| From: | Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Shay Rojansky <roji(at)roji(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should AT TIME ZONE be volatile? |
| Date: | 2021-11-11 22:04:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAMsGm5eP5wu7qvwa7kBOj-rqX4bxoksecwb09RadFu2sYpuZiQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 at 16:08, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 3:45 PM Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > There is however one kind of change at least that I think can be made
> safely: adding a new character in between existing characters. That
> shouldn't affect any existing indexes.
>
> Only if you can guarantee that said character is not present already.
> I don't think we update the end of the acceptable code point range
> every time that Unicode adds new stuff, so probably those things are
> subject to some default rule unless and until someone installs
> something more specific. Therefore I doubt that even this case is
> truly safe.
>
Wouldn't an existing index only have characters that were already part of
the collation? Attempting to use one not covered by the collation I would
have expected to cause an error at insert time. But definitely I agree I
wouldn't feel confident about the safety of any change.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2021-11-11 22:12:23 | Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 3 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-11-11 21:12:38 | Re: .ready and .done files considered harmful |