Re: Collation versioning

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Douglas Doole <dougdoole(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Collation versioning
Date: 2018-09-27 21:29:52
Message-ID: b65e3840-f8b7-b266-72d3-4b911512d0b1@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16/09/2018 20:12, Douglas Doole wrote:
> All this collation stuff is great, and I know users want it, but it
> feels like were pushing them out of an airplane with a ripped parachute
> every time the collation libraries change. Maybe they'll land safely or
> maybe things will get very messy.

At some point, a schema designer also needs to take some responsibility
for making smart choices for longevity. It is known that collations can
change, and the sort of changes that can happen are also generally
understood. So if you want to use range partitioning on text fields,
maybe you shouldn't, or at least choose the ranges conservatively.
Similarly, maybe you shouldn't have timestamp range partition boundaries
around DST changes or on the 29th of every month, and maybe you
shouldn't partition float values at negative zero. Some ideas are
better than others. We will help you recognize and fix breakage, but we
can't prevent it altogether.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2018-09-27 21:41:56 Re: [PATCH] Include application_name in "connection authorized" log message
Previous Message David Rowley 2018-09-27 21:20:18 Some incorrect comments and out-dated README from run-time pruning