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

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>
Cc: "Anton A(dot) Melnikov" <aamelnikov(at)inbox(dot)ru>, 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: 2022-12-24 00:55:07
Message-ID: Y6ZN67irjArDCZhS@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 10:39:25AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 05:51:28PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> FWIW, I find the use of a FOR loop with a DO block much cleaner to
>> follow in this context, so something like the attached would be able
>> to group the two queries and address your point on O(N^2). Do you
>> like that?
>
> LGTM. Thanks.

I am a bit busy for the next few days, but I may be able to get that
done next Monday.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2022-12-24 03:26:14 Re: Force streaming every change in logical decoding
Previous Message Joseph Koshakow 2022-12-23 23:03:36 Re: Infinite Interval