On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 at 11:31, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 09:23:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Hmmm ... I'd tend to do SELECT COUNT(*) FROM. But can't we provide
> > any actual checks on the sanity of the output? I realize that the
> > output's far from static, but still ...
>
> Honestly, checking all the fields is not that exciting, but the
> maximum I can think of that would be portable enough is something like
> the attached. No arithmetic operators for xid limits things a bit,
> but at least that's something.
>
> Thoughts?
The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased patch:
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID
33ab0a2a527e3af5beee3a98fc07201e555d6e45 ===
=== applying patch ./controldata-regression-2.patch
patching file src/test/regress/expected/misc_functions.out
Hunk #1 succeeded at 642 with fuzz 2 (offset 48 lines).
patching file src/test/regress/sql/misc_functions.sql
Hunk #1 FAILED at 223.
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file
src/test/regress/sql/misc_functions.sql.rej
[1] - http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_41_3711.log
Regards,
Vignesh
