From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: pg_upgrade: Check version of target cluster binaries |
Date: | 2021-03-04 00:06:36 |
Message-ID: | 9AB1BC9C-DEEC-414E-9A86-060D409C14FC@yesql.se |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
> On 3 Mar 2021, at 23:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 3/3/21 3:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Crake says this patch broke its cross-version upgrade tests:
>
>> The log says:
>> check for
>> "/home/andrew/bf/root/upgrade.crake/REL9_2_STABLE/inst/bin/postgres"
>> failed: incorrect version: found "postgres (PostgreSQL) 9.2.24",
>> expected "postgres (PostgreSQL) 14devel"
>> But that makes no sense at all. Looks like we're confusing the source and the target.
>
> On looking closer, I think the patch is just several bricks shy of a
> load. It's applying validate_exec (which insists on a match to its
> own version number) to *both* the source and target binaries. It
> must not check the source that way.
It's much to late to focus here at the moment, I will take a look in the
morning unless beaten to it.
--
Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-03-04 07:24:07 | Re: pgsql: pg_upgrade: Check version of target cluster binaries |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-03-03 22:04:41 | Re: pgsql: pg_upgrade: Check version of target cluster binaries |