On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 11:07:41AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 04:41:24PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > On 31 Aug 2022, at 15:59, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > > > > > Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> writes: > > >> Commit 38bfae36526 moved the .txt files pg_upgrade generates to a > > >> separate > > >> subdir, but there are a few left which are written to cwd. The thread > > >> resulting in that patch doesn't discuss these files specifically so it > > >> seems > > >> they are just an oversight. Unless I'm missing something. > > > > > >> Should something the attached be applied to ensure all generated files > > >> are > > >> placed in the subdirectory? > > > > > > It certainly looks inconsistent ATM. I wondered if maybe the plan was to > > > put routine output into the log directory but problem-reporting files > > > into cwd --- but that isn't what's happening now. > > The script files are intended to stay where they are, and the error > files are intended to move under the subdir, to allow for their easy > removal, per Tom's request.
Right. The .txt files reporting that something went wrong should be in the basedir, like loadable_libraries.txt, as these are not really internal logs but provide information about a failure state. I have double-checked the whole code of pg_upgrade, and I am not seeing another area to fix, so 0001 looks fine to me. This one is on me, so I guess that I'd like to take care of it myself. > It looks like I may have grepped for fprintf or similar, and missed > checking output_path. > > I updated your patach to put the logic inside > check_for_data_types_usage(), which is shorter, and seems to simplify > doing what's intended into the future. 0002 makes the code more complicated IMO, as we still need to report the location of the file in the logs. So I would leave things to what's proposed in 0001. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
