On Tue, 10 Mar 2026 at 21:13, Paul A Jungwirth <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 5:26 AM Kirill Reshke <[email protected]> wrote: > > When applying first two of patches from v67 series, my initdb fails: > > > > ``` > > reshke@yezzey-cbdb-bench:~/cpg$ ./bin/bin/initdb -D ./db > > The files belonging to this database system will be owned by user "reshke". > > This user must also own the server process. > > > > The database cluster will be initialized with locale "C.UTF-8". > > The default database encoding has accordingly been set to "UTF8". > > The default text search configuration will be set to "english". > > > > Data page checksums are enabled. > > > > creating directory db ... ok > > creating subdirectories ... ok > > selecting dynamic shared memory implementation ... posix > > selecting default "max_connections" ... 100 > > selecting default "shared_buffers" ... 128MB > > selecting default time zone ... Etc/UTC > > creating configuration files ... ok > > running bootstrap script ... ok > > performing post-bootstrap initialization ... 2026-03-10 12:21:05.842 > > UTC [2995664] WARNING: unrecognized node type: 155 > > 2026-03-10 12:21:05.842 UTC [2995664] FATAL: unrecognized node type: 155 > > 2026-03-10 12:21:05.842 UTC [2995664] STATEMENT: REVOKE ALL ON > > pg_authid FROM public; > > > > child process exited with exit code 1 > > initdb: removing data directory "db" > > ``` > > > > without v67-0002 initdb runs ok. > > > > Also, after v67-0002 my createdb fails: > > > > ``` > > reshke@yezzey-cbdb-bench:~/cpg$ ./bin/bin/createdb > > createdb: error: query failed: ERROR: syntax error at or near "(" > > LINE 1: SELECT pg_catalog.set_config('search_path', '', false); > > ^ > > createdb: detail: Query was: SELECT > > pg_catalog.set_config('search_path', '', false); > > ``` > > > > Simple queries also fails: > > ``` > > postgres=# select now(); > > WARNING: unrecognized node type: 144 > > ERROR: unrecognized node type: 76 > > ``` > > I don't see any of these problems here (after an error-free rebase > onto a198c26ded), and CI passes. Are you sure that was from a clean > build? If so, could you share your configure line? > > Thanks, > > -- > Paul ~{:-) > [email protected]
Sorry, It was indeed an issue on my side. It all gone after make maintainer-clean. Anyway, I was interested in by-hand testing of 0001 & 0002, which I did. I tested various partitioned table use-cases, including the new MERGE PARTITIONS feature, updating the partition column, etc. All seems to work just fine. The only review comment I have is that we may need tab-completion support for UPDATE ... [FOR PARTITION OF] pattern. -- Best regards, Kirill Reshke
