Re: PGXS testing upgrade paths

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > If there's a better list than this, please let me know, but I figured
> > hackers is appropriate since the extension building infrastructure is
> > documented in core.
>
> > While working on an in-house extension I realized that while PGXS
> > provides the standard regression test infrastructure, I'm not aware of
> > an automatic or standard way to test all upgrade paths provided by the
> > extension.
>
> The recommended way to deal with updates these days is to leave the
> original extension script as-is and just write update scripts
> (1.0--1.1, 1.1--1.2, etc). That way, application of the updates
> is tested automatically every time you do CREATE EXTENSION.

Ah, so just don't add a new 1.2 file, etc.

That also implies not having more direct upgrade paths (e.g., 1.0--1.2)?

> Now, if you also want to check that the intermediate states still
> behave as intended, I don't see much of a solution that doesn't
> involve custom test scaffolding.

Yeah, I'm not so much concerned about intermediate states so much as
multiple upgrade paths and/or multiple single-version install files
(which you replied to already above).

James