Re: Supporting non-deterministic collations with tailoring rules.

On 24.09.25 12:17, Daniel Verite wrote:
> To me, the most plausible fix on the Postgres side would be to pass
> UCOL_DEFAULT instead of UCOL_DEFAULT_STRENGTH as in the attached,
> which lets the user specify the strength in the rule, as the OP did in [1].

With this change, I don't see that the bug reported in ICU-22456 is 
fixed.  See attached my test case.

What change of behavior are you expecting from your patch?  Should there 
be test cases?