Re: pg_upgrade analyze script

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Georgios Kokolatos <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade analyze script
Date: 2020-11-11 01:21:27
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:21:04AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:47:22PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> You should just remove those calls. There is no need to replace them with
>> vacuumdb calls. The reason those calls were there is that they were testing
>> the generated script itself. If the script is gone, there is no more need.
>> There are already separate tests for testing vacuumdb.
> True, already does all that.

Let's fix that. From what I can see it only involves the attached,
and as a bobus it also reduces the number of extra characters showing
on my terminal after running pg_upgrade tests.

Attachment Content-Type Size
upgrade-test-vacuumdb.patch text/x-diff 1009 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2020-11-11 02:21:32 Re: Rethinking LOCK TABLE's behavior on views
Previous Message Kyotaro Horiguchi 2020-11-11 01:07:22 Re: shared-memory based stats collector