On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 09:46:51AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 12:25:33AM -0800, Nikhil Kumar Veldanda wrote:
>> The `SELECT count(*) FROM :reltoastname` assertion is a bit brittle
>> for `STORAGE EXTENDED`: depending on the toast compression method /
>> effectiveness, the value may end up as >1 chunk, which would flip the
>> expected count(*) = 1. Prefer SELECT count(DISTINCT chunk_id) FROM
>> :reltoastname (or WHERE chunk_seq = 0) and adjust expected.
>
> Yeah, this suggestion sounds sensible and that would still notice what
> I was able to break.
I have settled down to the addition of a qual based on chunk_seq,
being consistent with the other test, at the end, then applied the
result as 168765e5d42b. Thanks for the suggestions, Nikhil.
--
Michael
