Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-20 Thread Tom Turelinckx
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > For reference, here is the complete hotfix. Applied on skate/snapper, mussurana/tadarida, ibisbill/kittiwake. Best regards, Tom Turelinckx

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 9/19/20 12:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> Here's how cross version upgrade testing works. It uses a cached version of >> the binaries and data directory. The cache is only refreshed if there's a >> buildfarm run on that branch. If not, the cached version will just sit

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-19 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > Here's how cross version upgrade testing works. It uses a cached version of > the binaries and data directory. The cache is only refreshed if there's a > buildfarm run on that branch. If not, the cached version will just sit there > till kingdom come. So all this

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 9/19/20 10:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> On 9/18/20 6:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Done, you should be able to remove @#@ (NONE, bigint) from the >>> kill list. >> crake tests pg_upgrade back to 9.2, so I had to mangle those static >> repos for non-live branches like this:

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-19 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 9/18/20 6:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Done, you should be able to remove @#@ (NONE, bigint) from the >> kill list. > crake tests pg_upgrade back to 9.2, so I had to mangle those static > repos for non-live branches like this: Oh, hm. Now that you mention that, I see

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 9/18/20 6:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan writes: >>> Yeah, probably worth doing. It's a small enough change and it's only in >>> the test suite. >> OK, I'll go take care of that in a bit. > Done, you should be able to remove @#@ (NONE, bigint) from the > kill list. > >

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-18 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> Yeah, probably worth doing. It's a small enough change and it's only in >> the test suite. > OK, I'll go take care of that in a bit. Done, you should be able to remove @#@ (NONE, bigint) from the kill list. regards, tom lane

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-18 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 9/18/20 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Hmm, that's not a postfix operator ... oh, it's because it depends on the >> numeric_fac function alias which we also removed. We could eliminate >> the need to drop it if we changed the definition to use "factorial" >> instead of

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 9/18/20 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan writes: >> On 9/18/20 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I intentionally let that happen, figuring that it'd be good to get some >>> buildfarm cycles on the new code in pg_upgrade that does this check. >>> But now we have to think about updating

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-18 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 9/18/20 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I intentionally let that happen, figuring that it'd be good to get some >> buildfarm cycles on the new code in pg_upgrade that does this check. >> But now we have to think about updating the test. I think the best >> bet is just to

Re: XversionUpgrade tests broken by postfix operator removal

2020-09-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 9/18/20 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Unsurprisingly, commit 1ed6b8956 has led to the buildfarm's > cross-version upgrade tests no longer working, eg > > https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=tadarida=2020-09-18%2013%3A06%3A52 > > Checking for reg* data types in user tables