| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Todd Lang <Todd(dot)Lang(at)D2L(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Supporting non-deterministic collations with tailoring rules. |
| Date: | 2026-03-12 10:00:32 |
| Message-ID: | bc564aed-30c8-44b3-a960-1d0bc090e2fd@eisentraut.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24.09.25 12:17, Daniel Verite wrote:
> To me, the most plausible fix on the Postgres side would be to pass
> UCOL_DEFAULT instead of UCOL_DEFAULT_STRENGTH as in the attached,
> which lets the user specify the strength in the rule, as the OP did in [1].
With this change, I don't see that the bug reported in ICU-22456 is
fixed. See attached my test case.
What change of behavior are you expecting from your patch? Should there
be test cases?
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| nocfbot-0001-Test-for-collation-customization-with-rules-loses-at.patch | text/plain | 1.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jinbinge | 2026-03-12 10:12:06 | Re:Re: Odd code around ginScanToDelete |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2026-03-12 09:47:37 | Re: Skipping schema changes in publication |