Re: pg_basebackup check vs Windows file path limits - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: pg_basebackup check vs Windows file path limits
Date
Msg-id 3B1D0F8A-DB97-462A-937F-73B3FCFE2713@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_basebackup check vs Windows file path limits  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: pg_basebackup check vs Windows file path limits
List pgsql-hackers
> On 5 Jul 2023, at 14:49, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> On 2023-07-04 Tu 16:54, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> On 4 Jul 2023, at 20:19, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> But sadly we're kinda back where we started. fairywren is failing on REL_16_STABLE. Before the changes the failure
occurredbecause the test script was unable to create the file with a path > 255. Now that we have a way to create the
filethe test for pg_basebackup to reject files with names > 100 fails, I presume because the server can't actually see
thefile. At this stage I'm thinking the best thing would be to skip the test altogether on windows if the path is
longerthan 255. 
>>>
>> That does sound like a fairly large hammer for a nail small enough that we
>> should be able to fix it, but I don't have any other good ideas off the cuff.
>
> Not sure it's such a big hammer. Here's a patch.

No objections to the patch, LGTM.

--
Daniel Gustafsson




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: UUID v7
Next
From: Alena Rybakina
Date:
Subject: Re: Problems with estimating OR conditions, IS NULL on LEFT JOINs