Re: [18] Policy on IMMUTABLE functions and Unicode updates

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 01:07:49PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-07-23 at 07:39 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > Short-term, we should remedy the step backward that pg_c_utf8 has taken:
> > https://postgr.es/m/20240718233908.52.nmisch@google.com
> > https://postgr.es/m/486d71991a3f80ec1c47e1bd7931e2ef3627b6b3.camel@cybertec.at
> 
> Obviously I disagree that we've taken a step backwards.

Yes.

> Can you articulate the principle by which all of the other problems
> with IMMUTABLE are just fine, but updates to Unicode are intolerable,
> and only for PG_C_UTF8?

No, because I don't think all the other problems with IMMUTABLE are just fine.
The two messages linked cover the comparisons I do consider important,
especially the comparison between pg_c_utf8 and packager-frozen ICU.