| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE lock downgrades have broken pg_upgrade |
| Date: | 2016-05-11 14:24:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20160511142442.GL22756@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:40:09AM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Not that that would be useless, but note that the value in this case (and
> most others) comes from having a candidate object in the database before
> upgrade that exercises the particular problem, mostly independent of what
> version you upgrade from and to. So far the way to do that is to leave
> "junk" in the regression test database, but that's clearly a bit silly.
>
> I think the way forward is to create a TAP test suite for pg_upgrade that
> specifically exercises a lot of scenarios with small purpose-built test
> databases.
>
> Then, the problem of having to compare dump output across versions also goes
> away more easily.
I do have some small tests like for tablespaces. I am attaching the SQL
script, if that is helpful.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg_upgrade_test.sql | application/x-sql | 3.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2016-05-11 14:24:44 | Re: Academic help for Postgres |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-05-11 14:23:22 | Re: asynchronous and vectorized execution |