From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Vejsada <pve(at)paymorrow(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate |
Date: | 2022-06-15 19:32:04 |
Message-ID: | 540147.1655321524@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> writes:
> But Petr has a point - pg_upgrade should aspire to catch errors in --check,
> rather than starting and then leaving a mess behind for the user to clean up
Agreed; pg_upgrade has historically tried to find problems similar to
this. However, it's not just aggregates that are at risk. People
might also have built user-defined plain functions, or operators,
atop these functions. How far do we want to go in looking?
As for the query, I think it could be simplified quite a bit by
relying on regprocedure literals, that is something like
WHERE ... a.aggtransfn IN
('array_append(anyarray,anyelement)'::regprocedure,
'array_prepend(anyelement,anyarray)'::regprocedure,
...)
Not sure if it's necessary to stick explicit "pg_catalog." schema
qualifications into this --- IIRC pg_upgrade runs with restrictive
search_path, so that this would be safe as-is.
Also, I think you need to check aggfinalfn too.
Also, I'd be inclined to reject system-provided objects by checking
for OID >= 16384 rather than hard-wiring assumptions about things
being in pg_catalog or not.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-06-16 01:34:22 | Re: Using PQexecQuery in pipeline mode produces unexpected Close messages |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-06-15 18:56:42 | Re: Using PQexecQuery in pipeline mode produces unexpected Close messages |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-06-15 20:27:41 | Re: better page-level checksums |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-06-15 18:56:42 | Re: Using PQexecQuery in pipeline mode produces unexpected Close messages |