Re: [BUG] pg_upgrade test fails from older versions.

From: "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [BUG] pg_upgrade test fails from older versions.
Date: 2022-12-27 12:26:10
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 27.12.2022 08:44, Michael Paquier wrote:
> It is worth noting that perlcritic was complaining here, as eval is
> getting used with a string. I have spent a few days looking at that,
> and I really want a maximum of flexibility in the rules that can be
> applied so I have put a "no critic" rule, which is fine by me as this
> extra file is something owned by the user and it would apply only to
> cross-version upgrades.

I think it's a very smart decision. Thank you very match!

> So it looks like we are now done here.. With all these pieces in
> place in the tests, I don't see why it would not be possible to
> automate the cross-version tests of pg_upgrade.

I've checked the cross-upgrade test form 9.5+ to current master and
have found no problem with accuracy up to dumps filtering.
For cross-version tests automation one have to write additional
filtering rules in the external files.

I would like to try realize this, better in a separate thread.
If there are no other considerations could you close the corresponding
record on the January CF, please?

With the best wishes!

Anton A. Melnikov
Postgres Professional:
The Russian Postgres Company

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2022-12-27 13:31:01 Re: Error-safe user functions
Previous Message Michail Nikolaev 2022-12-27 12:19:01 Re: Data loss on logical replication, 12.12 to 14.5, ALTER SUBSCRIPTION