Hi,
On 2023-02-17 09:01:54 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-02-17 at 00:06 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-02-14 at 09:59 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > I am saying that pg_upgrade should be able to deal with the
> > > difference. The
> > > details of how to implement that, don't matter that much.
> >
> > To clarify, you're saying that pg_upgrade should simply update
> > pg_database to set the new databases' collation fields equal to that
> > of
> > the old cluster?
Yes.
> Thinking about this more, it's not clear to me if this would be in
> scope for pg_upgrade or not.
I don't think we should consider changing the default collation provider
without making this more seamless, one way or another.
> If pg_upgrade is fixing up the new cluster rather than checking for
> compatibility, why doesn't it just take over and do the initdb for the new
> cluster itself? That would be less confusing for users, and avoid some
> weirdness (like, if you drop the database "postgres" on the original, why
> does it reappear after an upgrade?).
I've wondered about that as well. There are some initdb-time options you can
set, but pg_upgrade could forward those.
Greetings,
Andres Freund