Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 5:25 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:19:33PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> > Sorry for replying late here. The refactored code in
> > 002_compare_backups.pl has a potential to cause confusion even without
> > this refactoring. The differences in tablespace paths are adjusted in
> > compare_files() and not in the actual dump outputs. In case there's a
> > difference other than paths, diff between the dump outputs is reported
> > which will also show the differences in paths. That might mislead
> > developers in thinking that the differences in paths are also not
> > expected. Am I right?
>
> Logically, 002_compare_backups.pl is still the same, isn't it? We're
> still passing the file paths to compare_text(), except that the
> comparison routine is given as an argument one level higher.

Yes. That's right. Not something introduced by
169208092f5c98a6021b23b38f03a5d65f84ad96.

>
> You are right that there could be an argument for changing the files
> are they are on-disk, and do a diff based on what's on disk after what
> has changed so as the filtered parts are out of the report. However,
> there is also an argument for not changing them as that's more useful
> to know the original state of the dump for debugging. This one
> involves only a small change, which is OK as-is, IMHO.

Fine. We know what to fix if an ambiguity arises in future.

--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat