| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_upgade vs config |
| Date: | 2016-10-02 22:15:41 |
| Message-ID: | 21874.1475446541@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> So it doesn't seem that we've broken anything since 9.5 --- it didn't
> work before either. The seeming successes may have been due to chance,
> i.e. pg_upgrade probing the libraries in an order that happened to work.
> I see no evidence that get_loadable_libraries/check_loadable_libraries
> are paying any attention to what order the libraries are checked in.
It occurs to me that a back-patchable workaround for this would be to
make get_loadable_libraries sort the library names in order by length
(and I guess we might as well sort same-length names alphabetically).
This would for example guarantee that hstore_plpython is probed after
both hstore and plpython. Admittedly, this is a kluge of the first
water. But I see no prospect of back-patching any real fix, and it
would definitely be better if pg_upgrade didn't fail on these modules.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-10-02 22:39:27 | Re: pg_upgade vs config |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-02 21:59:47 | Re: pg_upgade vs config |