Re: pg_upgrade check fails on Solaris 10 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: pg_upgrade check fails on Solaris 10
Date
Msg-id 20190923164137.GA18245@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade check fails on Solaris 10  (Marina Polyakova <m.polyakova@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade check fails on Solaris 10
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-Sep-23, Marina Polyakova wrote:

> On 2019-09-18 17:36, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On 2019-Sep-17, Marina Polyakova wrote:
> > 

> > > We got an error for pg_upgrade check on the branch REL_11_STABLE
> > > (commit
> > > 40ad4202513c72f5c1beeb03e26dfbc8890770c0) on Solaris 10 because IIUC
> > > the
> > > argument to the sed command is not enclosed in quotation marks (see
> > > [1]):
> > 
> > Hmm, I'm surprised it has taken this long to detect the problem.
> 
> Looking at the members of buildfarm [1] castoroides and protosciurus  - IIUC
> they do not check pg_upgrade. And I was that lucky one who have run the
> branch with the latest commits at our buildfarm...

Argh.

But I meant "how come nobody runs pg_upgrade tests on old Solaris?"

> > I have pushed it to all branches that have src/bin/pg_upgrade (namely,
> > 9.5 onwards), thanks.  I hope this won't make the msys/mingw machines
> > angry ;-)
> 
> Thank you! I ran pg_upgrade tests for MSYS, everything is fine.
> 
> The branch REL9_4_STABLE (commit 8a17afe84be6fefe76d0d2f4d26c5ee075e64487)
> has the same issue - according to the release table [2] it is still
> supported, isn't it?...

Yeah, but pg_upgrade is in contrib/ in 9.4, so nowhere as good as from
9.5 onwards; and it's going to die in a couple of months anyway, so I'm
not thrilled about fixing this there.

If you *need* to have this fixed in 9.4, we can do that, but do you?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Marina Polyakova
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade check fails on Solaris 10
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [proposal] de-TOAST'ing using a iterator