Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 9/6/16 1:40 PM, Doug Doole wrote: >> We carried the ICU version numbers around on our collation and locale >> IDs (such as fr_FR%icu36) . The database would load multiple versions of >> the ICU library so that something created with ICU 3.6 would always be >> processed with ICU 3.6. This avoided the problems of trying to change >> the rules on the user. (We'd always intended to provide tooling to allow >> the user to move an existing object up to a newer version of ICU, but we >> never got around to doing it.) In the code, this meant we were >> explicitly calling the versioned API so that we could keep the calls >> straight.
> I understand that in principle, but I don't see operating system > providers shipping a bunch of ICU versions to facilitate that. They > will usually ship one. I agree with that estimate, and I would further venture that even if we wanted to bundle ICU into our tarballs, distributors would rip it out again on security grounds. I am dead certain Red Hat would do so; less sure that other vendors have similar policies, but it seems likely. They don't want to have to fix security bugs in more than one place. This is a problem, if ICU won't guarantee cross-version compatibility, because it destroys the argument that moving to ICU would offer us collation behavior stability. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers