Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing
Date: 2025-02-21 10:46:52
Message-ID: 4DCB0B25-F6E2-4918-AB35-1C2995487F23@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Feb 21, 2025, at 4:55 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 04:36:07AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The fix has broken cross version upgrade test. Maybe we need to filter out
>> NO INDENT in releases prior to 16 in AdjustUpgrade.pm?s
>
> Yes, I was just looking at that. The regex I am finishing with in
> AdjustUpgrade.pm is something like that, which is enough to discard
> the NO INDENT clause in an XMLSERIALIZE:
> --- src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade.pm
> +++ src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade
> @@ -628,6 +628,12 @@ sub adjust_new_dumpfile
> \s+FUNCTION\s2\s\(text,\stext\)\spublic\.part_hashtext_length\(text,bigint\);} {}mxg;
> }
>
> + # pre-v16 dumps do not know about XMLSERIALIZE(NO INDENT).
> + if ($old_version < 16)
> + {
> + $dump =~ s/XMLSERIALIZE\((.*)? NO INDENT\)/XMLSERIALIZE\($1\)/mg;
> + }
>
> This needs to be applied in adjust_new_dumpfile() so as the comparison
> with the old dump will be stable, is that right?

I think so. Looks good to me

Cheers

Andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2025-02-21 10:52:54 Re: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2025-02-21 10:41:59 Re: Support NOT VALID / VALIDATE constraint options for named NOT NULL constraints