Re: pg_upgrade test for binary compatibility of core data types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: pg_upgrade test for binary compatibility of core data types
Date
Msg-id 66753439-83ae-7be5-6e41-9537a6041a39@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_upgrade test for binary compatibility of core data types  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: pg_upgrade test for binary compatibility of core data types  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1/12/21 12:53 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:27:53AM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> Uh, what exactly is missing from the beta checklist?  I read the patch
>>> and commit message but don't understand it.
>> Did you try to use test.sh to upgrade from a prior release ?
>>
>> Evidently it's frequently forgotten, as evidenced by all the "deferred
>> maintenance" I had to do to allow testing the main patch (currently 0003).
>>
>> See also:
>>
>> commit 5bab1985dfc25eecf4b098145789955c0b246160
>> Author: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> Date:   Thu Jun 8 13:48:27 2017 -0400
>>
>>     Fix bit-rot in pg_upgrade's test.sh, and improve documentation.
>>     
>>     Doing a cross-version upgrade test with test.sh evidently hasn't been
>>     tested since circa 9.2, because the script lacked case branches for
>>     old-version servers newer than 9.1.  Future-proof that a bit, and
>>     clean up breakage induced by our recent drop of V0 function call
>>     protocol (namely that oldstyle_length() isn't in the regression
>>     suite anymore).
> Oh, that is odd.  I thought that was regularly run.  I have my own test
> infrastructure that I run for every major release so I never have run
> the built-in one, except for make check-world.
>

Cross version pg_upgrade is tested regularly in the buildfarm, but not
using test.sh. Instead it uses the saved data repository from a previous
run of the buildfarm client for the source branch, and tries to upgrade
that to the target branch.


cheers


andrew



--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump INDEX ATTACH versus --clean option
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump INDEX ATTACH versus --clean option