| From: | Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing |
| Date: | 2025-02-21 11:29:12 |
| Message-ID: | 6d146918-dbd6-4de2-bdd1-80471c1e0053@uni-muenster.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Michael & Andrew
On 21.02.25 11:46, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> On Feb 21, 2025, at 4:55 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 04:36:07AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> The fix has broken cross version upgrade test. Maybe we need to filter out
>>> NO INDENT in releases prior to 16 in AdjustUpgrade.pm?s
>> Yes, I was just looking at that. The regex I am finishing with in
>> AdjustUpgrade.pm is something like that, which is enough to discard
>> the NO INDENT clause in an XMLSERIALIZE:
>> --- src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade.pm
>> +++ src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade
>> @@ -628,6 +628,12 @@ sub adjust_new_dumpfile
>> \s+FUNCTION\s2\s\(text,\stext\)\spublic\.part_hashtext_length\(text,bigint\);} {}mxg;
>> }
>>
>> + # pre-v16 dumps do not know about XMLSERIALIZE(NO INDENT).
>> + if ($old_version < 16)
>> + {
>> + $dump =~ s/XMLSERIALIZE\((.*)? NO INDENT\)/XMLSERIALIZE\($1\)/mg;
>> + }
>>
>> This needs to be applied in adjust_new_dumpfile() so as the comparison
>> with the old dump will be stable, is that right?
> I think so. Looks good to me
Thanks for the quick response!
For future reference, what’s the best way to verify this myself? The
buildfarm was all green.
Best regards, Jim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Jones | 2025-02-21 11:36:22 | Re: [PoC] XMLCast (SQL/XML X025) |
| Previous Message | Dmitry Dolgov | 2025-02-21 11:07:25 | Re: Reducing memory consumed by RestrictInfo list translations in partitionwise join planning |