Re: Regression failures after changing PostgreSQL blocksize

On Saturday, February 21, 2026, Alexandre Felipe <
o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> (I personally think that we could have the input and expected output in
> one single file).
>

Even if we could why would that be an improvement - green-field, let alone
the motivation for refactoring.

By default it ignores comments and spaces, and in the expected file you can
> enable/disable other things, e.g. ignoring numbers in specific lines would
> probably help with the 32kB failures.
>

What’s the minimum functionality you’d need to get block size variances to
be auto-accepted using existing expected outputs. Most/all of what you’ve
decided to allow to be ignored has no variability based on setting values
or environment - and likely would be stuff we wouldn’t want to be optional
(i.e., you need to justify each option). And there is no demonstration of
actually solving the problem at hand.

I’d also go for an approach like: if block size <> 8kb then re-process any
exception output diffs/files again using the looser constraints.
Otherwise, stop and report test failure (status quo). I’d be against
applying these kinds of bypasses to stock configured PostgreSQL for which a
complete set of copy-and-pasted expected files need to exist.

David J.