From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_dump getBlobs query broken for 7.3 servers |
Date: | 2016-10-07 17:34:12 |
Message-ID: | 15728.1475861652@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>> It might be a good idea to retroactively modify 9.1-9.3 so that there
>> are some blobs in the final state, for purposes of testing pg_dump and
>> pg_upgrade.
> I certainly think that would be a good idea. I thought we had been
> insisting on coverage via the regression tests for a lot farther back
> than 9.4. though perhaps that was only for newer features and we never
> went back and added it for existing capabilities.
Well, there were regression tests for blobs for a long time, but they
carefully cleaned up their mess. It was only in 70ad7ed4e that we
made them leave some blobs behind.
I took a quick look at back-patching that commit, but the test would
need to be rewritten to not depend on features that don't exist
further back (like \gset), which likely explains why I didn't do it
at the time.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-10-07 17:39:03 | Re: pgbench vs. wait events |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-10-07 17:31:00 | Re: pg_dump getBlobs query broken for 7.3 servers |