Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+HiwqG-n-hUho28otQRSZXBatB9DU-E4yJVa4whwCAqfWW29A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: on placeholder entries in view rule action query's range table (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:45 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 10:06 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >> I've pushed this with some cleanup --- aside from fixing > >> outfuncs/readfuncs, I did some more work on the comments, which > >> I think you were too sloppy about. > > > Thanks a lot for the fixes. > > It looks like we're not out of the woods on this: the buildfarm > members that run cross-version-upgrade tests are all unhappy. > Most of them are not reporting any useful details, but I suspect > that they are barfing because dumps from the old server include > table-qualified variable names in some CREATE VIEW commands while > dumps from HEAD omit the qualifications. I don't see any > mechanism in TestUpgradeXversion.pm that could deal with that > conveniently, and in any case we'd have to roll out a client > script update to the affected animals. I fear we may have to > revert this pending development of better TestUpgradeXversion.pm > support. Ah, OK, no problem. -- Thanks, Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: