Re: [PATCH] Fix pg_upgrade test from v10

From: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
To: "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix pg_upgrade test from v10
Date: 2022-07-05 19:08:24
Message-ID: 20220705190824.GS13040@telsasoft.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 09:01:49AM +0300, Anton A. Melnikov wrote:
> On 01.07.2022 20:07, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > It's silly to say that v9.2 will be supported potentially for a handful more
> > years, but that the upgrade-testing script itself doesn't support that, so
> > developers each have to reinvent its fixups.
>
> I've test the attached patch in all variants from v9.5..15 to supported
> versions 10..master. The script test.sh for 9.5->10 and 9.6->10 upgrades
> works fine without any patch.
> In 9.4 there is a regress test largeobject to be patched to allow upgrade
> test from this version.So i've stopped at 9.5.
> This is clear that we limit the destination version for upgrade test to the
> supported versions only. In our case destination versions
> starting from the 10th inclusively.
> But is there are a limit for the source version for upgrade test from?

As of last year, there's a reasonably clear policy for support of old versions:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/pgupgrade.html
|pg_upgrade supports upgrades from 9.2.X and later to the current major release of PostgreSQL, including snapshot and beta releases.

See: e469f0aaf3c586c8390bd65923f97d4b1683cd9f

So it'd be ideal if this were to support versions down to 9.2.

This is failing in cfbot:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/anton-melnikov.html

..since it tries to apply all the *.patch files to the master branch, one after
another. For branches other than master, I suggest to name the patches *.txt
or similar. Or, just focus for now on allowing upgrades *to* master. I'm not
sure if anyone is interested in patching test.sh in backbranches. I'm not
sure, but there may be more interest to backpatch the conversion to TAP
(322becb60).

--
Justin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-07-05 19:08:54 Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-07-05 19:06:31 Re: PSA: Autoconf has risen from the dead