Re: Extracting cross-version-upgrade knowledge from buildfarm client
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Extracting cross-version-upgrade knowledge from buildfarm client |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6e3ad198-88dc-0173-dd5d-3b232c220361@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Extracting cross-version-upgrade knowledge from buildfarm client (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Extracting cross-version-upgrade knowledge from buildfarm client
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-07-19 We 07:05, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
I just hit a snag testing this. It turns out that the PostgreSQL::Version comparison stuff believes that 16beta2 < 16, which sounds reasonable. However, because of that, the AdjustUpgrade.pm stanza that tries to drop tables public.gtest_normal_child{2} in versions earlier than 16 fails, because by 16 these tables are dropped in the test itself rather than left to linger, as was the case in versions 15 and earlier. So, if you try to run the pg_upgrade test with a dump created by 16beta2, it will fail to drop these tables (because they don't exist) and the whole test fails. Why hasn't the buildfarm detected this problem? I see that Drongo is happy, but I don't understand why. Apparently, the AdjustUpgrade.pm stuff leaves no trace.
The buildfarm module assumes that no adjustments are necessary if the old and new versions are the same (e.g. HEAD to HEAD). And it never passes in a version like '16beta2'. It extracts the version number from the branch name, e.g. REL_16_STABLE => 16.
I can fix this either by using DROP IF EXISTS in that stanza, or by making AdjustUpgrade use 'version <= 15'. Any opinions on which to prefer?
The trouble is this could well break the next time someone puts in a test like this.
Maybe we need to make AdjustUpgrade just look at the major version, something like:
$old_version = PostgreSQL::Version->new($old_version->major);
cheers
andrew
-- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: