On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:13:37AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Sun, Apr 18, 2021 at 4:23 AM Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So IIUC the issue here is that the code could previously record useless > > collation version dependencies in somes cases, which could lead to false > > positive possible corruption messages (and of course additional bloat on > > pg_depend). False positive messages can't be avoided anyway, as a collation > > version update may not corrupt the actually indexed set of data, especially > > for > > glibc. > > This argument seems completely absurd to me.
I'm not sure why? For glibc at least, I don't see how we could not end up raising false positive as you have a single glibc version for all its collations. If a user has say en_US and fr_FR, or any quite stable collation, most of the glibc upgrades (except 2.28 of course) won't corrupt your indexes.
