Re: ALTER TYPE DROP + composite-typed col vs. pg_upgrade - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: ALTER TYPE DROP + composite-typed col vs. pg_upgrade
Date
Msg-id 4DD7AF3A.1070301@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to ALTER TYPE DROP + composite-typed col vs. pg_upgrade  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER TYPE DROP + composite-typed col vs. pg_upgrade  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 28.04.2011 15:41, Noah Misch wrote:
> Now that we have ALTER TYPE DROP ATTRIBUTE, pg_dump --binary-upgrade must, for
> the sake of composite-typed columns, preserve the dropped-column configuration
> of stand-alone composite types.  Here's a test case:
>
> create type t as (x int, y int);
> create table has_a (tcol t);
> insert into has_a values ('(1,2)');
> table has_a; -- (1,2)
> alter type t drop attribute y cascade, add attribute z int cascade;
> table has_a; -- (1,)
> table has_a; -- after pg_upgrade: (1,2)
>
> Apparently I did not fully test the last version after merging it with upstream
> changes, because it did not work.  Sorry for that.  This version updates the
> queries correctly and adds a test case.  A regular "make check" passes the new
> test case with or without the rest of this patch.  However, a comparison of
> regression database dumps before and after a pg_upgrade will reveal the problem
> given this new test case.  See, for example, Peter's recent patch to have the
> contrib/pg_upgrade "make check" do this.

Ok, committed.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: eviscerating the parser
Next
From: Mark
Date:
Subject: Re: ts_rank