On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > What I find astonishing is that whoever maintains glibc (or the Red > Hat packaging for it) thinks it's OK to change the collation order in > a minor release. I'd understand changing it between, say, RHEL 6 and > RHEL 7. But the idea that minor release, supposedly safe updates > think they can whack this around without breaking applications really > kind of blows my mind.
Why wouldn't they feel entitled to? To quote UTS #10 [1]: """ Collation order is not fixed. Over time, collation order will vary: there may be fixes needed as more information becomes available about languages; there may be new government or industry standards for the language that require changes; and finally, new characters added to the Unicode Standard will interleave with the previously-defined ones. This means that collations must be carefully versioned. """ Indeed, they do version collations with LC_IDENTIFICATION. We just don't make any attempt to use the version information. In short, this is our fault. :-( [1] http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr10/#Stability -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
