Re: pgsql: Update pg_upgrade test for reg* to include regrole and regnamesp

On 11/27/18 3:38 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-11-27 10:47:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> In any case, I think we will probably need to bite the bullet and have
>>> pg_dump render LOs in OID order.
>> +1. Looking at the relevant code:
>>
>> /*
>> * Currently, we re-fetch all BLOB OIDs using a cursor. Consider scanning
>> * the already-in-memory dumpable objects instead...
>> */
>> if (fout->remoteVersion >= 90000)
>> blobQry = "DECLARE bloboid CURSOR FOR SELECT oid FROM pg_largeobject_metadata";
>> else
>> blobQry = "DECLARE bloboid CURSOR FOR SELECT DISTINCT loid FROM pg_largeobject";
> Done. Thanks for chiming in.
>
> Andrew, the <= 9.2 failure https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=crake&dt=2018-11-27%2018%3A18%3A21
> seems to be related to nabstime etc not being available anymore. We've
> not backpatched
>
> Author: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Branch: REL_11_STABLE Release: REL_11_0 [184951a48] 2018-10-12 19:33:56 -0400
> Branch: REL_10_STABLE Release: REL_10_6 [9320263ae] 2018-10-12 19:33:56 -0400
> Branch: REL9_6_STABLE Release: REL9_6_11 [2ad422ce1] 2018-10-12 19:33:56 -0400
> Branch: REL9_5_STABLE Release: REL9_5_15 [43cc4e49e] 2018-10-12 19:33:56 -0400
> Branch: REL9_4_STABLE Release: REL9_4_20 [7b88c1ddd] 2018-10-12 19:33:57 -0400
> Branch: REL9_3_STABLE Release: REL9_3_25 [fb583c80d] 2018-10-12 19:33:57 -0400
>
> Remove abstime, reltime, tinterval tables from old regression databases.
>
> that far. I've locally verified that upgrade works after
>
> SELECT format('ALTER TABLE %s DROP COLUMN %s;', attrelid::regclass, attname) FROM pg_attribute WHERE attrelid > 16384 AND atttypid IN ('abstime'::regtype, 'reltime'::regtype, 'tinterval'::regtype)
> \gexec
>
> or something in that vein.
>

Thanks.

I'm just dropping the tables for REL_12. There is no point in just
dropping the columns - they are one-column tables.

The reason you're seeing this is that given the discussion about
pg_upgrade support I wanted to make sure that we had coverage for live +
2 releases. Should be green the next time it reports.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services