On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 12:15:59PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:13:52PM -0600, Justin Pryzby wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 03:28:08PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > I think these patches could use some in-place documentation of what they > > > are > > > trying to achieve and how they do it. The required information is spread > > > over a lengthy thread. No one wants to read that. Add commit messages to > > > the patches. > > > > 0001 patch fixes pg_upgrade/test.sh, which was disfunctional. > > Portions of the first patch were independently handled by commits 52202bb39, > > fa744697c, 091866724. So this is rebased on those. > > I guess updating this script should be a part of a beta-checklist somewhere, > > since I guess nobody will want to backpatch changes for testing older > > releases. > > Uh, what exactly is missing from the beta checklist? I read the patch > and commit message but don't understand it.
Did you try to use test.sh to upgrade from a prior release ? Evidently it's frequently forgotten, as evidenced by all the "deferred maintenance" I had to do to allow testing the main patch (currently 0003). See also: commit 5bab1985dfc25eecf4b098145789955c0b246160 Author: Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu Jun 8 13:48:27 2017 -0400 Fix bit-rot in pg_upgrade's test.sh, and improve documentation. Doing a cross-version upgrade test with test.sh evidently hasn't been tested since circa 9.2, because the script lacked case branches for old-version servers newer than 9.1. Future-proof that a bit, and clean up breakage induced by our recent drop of V0 function call protocol (namely that oldstyle_length() isn't in the regression suite anymore). -- Justin