> > The comment above the query in the official documentation is rather > > assertive > > (even if may true to the letter) and may warrant some more cautionary > > wording ? Added, perhaps, some variation of this: > > > > > For now, the only safe way to go is either reindex everything, or > > > everything > > > except some safe cases (non-partial indexes on plain-non-collatable > > > datatypes > > > only). > > I think the comment is very poorly worded, as it leads readers to believe that > objects with a pg_depend dependency on a collation are the only one that would > get corrupted in case of glibc/ICU upgrade. > > I agree that there should be a big fat red warning saying something like > "reindex everything if there's any discrepancy between the recorded collation > version and the currently reported one unless you REALLY know what you're > doing."
Given that it does not seem straightforward to mechanically detect objects in need of a collation-associated rebuild I would think that such a warning would change matters for the better, documentation-wise. Karsten
