From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgade vs config |
Date: | 2016-10-02 23:21:00 |
Message-ID: | 25402.1475450460@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> It occurs to me that a back-patchable workaround for this would be to
> make get_loadable_libraries sort the library names in order by length
> (and I guess we might as well sort same-length names alphabetically).
> This would for example guarantee that hstore_plpython is probed after
> both hstore and plpython. Admittedly, this is a kluge of the first
> water. But I see no prospect of back-patching any real fix, and it
> would definitely be better if pg_upgrade didn't fail on these modules.
I've tested the attached and verified that it allows pg_upgrade'ing
of the hstore_plpython regression DB --- or, if I reverse the sort
order, that it reproducibly fails. I propose back-patching this
at least as far as 9.5, where the transform modules came in. It might
be a good idea to go all the way back, just so that the behavior is
predictable.
regards, tom lane
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pgupgrade-predictable-LOAD-test-order.patch | text/x-diff | 5.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-03 00:36:39 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Copy-editing for contrib/pg_visibility documentation. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-10-02 22:55:29 | Re: pg_upgade vs config |