On Wed, 2023-10-11 at 08:51 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I don't see how this would really work in practice. Whether your
> data
> has unassigned code points or not, when the collations are updated to
> the next Unicode version, the collations will have a new version
> number,
> and so you need to run the refresh procedure in any case.
Even with a version number, we don't provide a great reresh procedure
or document how it should be done. In practice, avoiding unassigned
code points might mitigate some kinds of problems, especially for glibc
which has a very coarse version number.
In any case, a CHECK constraint to avoid unassigned code points has
utility to be forward-compatible with normalization, and also might
just be a good sanity check.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
