On 3/8/22 15:02, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-03-08 10:42:31 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> crake also failed. Looks like plpy_plpymodule.h needs to include
>>> plpython.h. A
>>> pre-existing issue that just didn't happen to cause problems...
>> Fixed that.
> Hm. Now crake failed in X
On 08.03.22 20:03, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2022-03-08 13:49:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
A bit depressing to have a 500 line alternative output file for a one line
diff :(.
Yeah. How badly do we need that particular test case?
A bit hard to tell. The test was intro
Hi,
On 2022-03-08 10:42:31 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > crake also failed. Looks like plpy_plpymodule.h needs to include
> > plpython.h. A
> > pre-existing issue that just didn't happen to cause problems...
>
> Fixed that.
Hm. Now crake failed in XversionUpgrade-REL9_2_STABLE-HEAD:
https://b
Hi,
On 2022-03-08 13:49:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > A bit depressing to have a 500 line alternative output file for a one line
> > diff :(.
>
> Yeah. How badly do we need that particular test case?
A bit hard to tell. The test was introduced in
commit 2bd78eb8d51cc9ee
Andres Freund writes:
> A bit depressing to have a 500 line alternative output file for a one line
> diff :(.
Yeah. How badly do we need that particular test case?
regards, tom lane
Hi,
On 2022-03-07 20:59:16 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-03-07 23:39:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund writes:
> > wrasse says you were too quick to drop plpython_error_5.out.
>
> Does look like it. I'll try to find a distribution with an old python...
debian 8 did the trick.
Hi,
On 2022-03-07 23:39:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2022-03-07 20:11:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> This version seems ready-to-go to me, or at least ready to see
> >> what the buildfarm makes of it.
>
> > Pushed. Let's see...
>
> wrasse says you were too quick to d
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-03-07 20:11:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This version seems ready-to-go to me, or at least ready to see
>> what the buildfarm makes of it.
> Pushed. Let's see...
wrasse says you were too quick to drop plpython_error_5.out.
Otherwise looks pretty good so far.
On 2022-03-07 20:11:52 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> This version seems ready-to-go to me, or at least ready to see
> what the buildfarm makes of it.
Pushed. Let's see...
Andres Freund writes:
> A related question is whether we want to remove $(python_majorversion)
> references in the makefiles?
I wouldn't. I'm doubtful of your theory that there will never be
a Python 4.
This version seems ready-to-go to me, or at least ready to see
what the buildfarm makes of i
Andres Freund writes:
> Now that the BF has stabilized, I've rebased and cleaned up the patches I'd
> posted earlier. Attached for the first time is my attempt at cleaning up the
> docs.
I looked through this quickly, and have a couple of nitpicks. The
PGFILEDESC value for jsonb_plpython is word
Hi,
On 2022-03-06 17:30:15 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> 0003, the removal of code level support for Python 2, is now a good bit bigger
> bigger, due to the removal of the last remnants of the Py2/3 porting layer.
Oh, huh. Something here seems to be broken, causing a crash on windows, but
not els
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 07:59:01AM -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:50:07PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Mark Wong writes:
> > > Take 3. :)
> >
> > > I've upgraded everyone to the v14 buildfarm scripts and made sure the
> > > --test passed on HEAD on each one. So I hopefully di
On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 08:50:07PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Wong writes:
> > Take 3. :)
>
> > I've upgraded everyone to the v14 buildfarm scripts and made sure the
> > --test passed on HEAD on each one. So I hopefully didn't miss any
> > (other than the one EOL OpenSUSE version that I will
Mark Wong writes:
> Take 3. :)
> I've upgraded everyone to the v14 buildfarm scripts and made sure the
> --test passed on HEAD on each one. So I hopefully didn't miss any
> (other than the one EOL OpenSUSE version that I will plan on upgrading.)
Thanks!
However ... it seems like most of your a
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 03:28:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mark Wong writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 08:22:29AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> Unfortunately it looks like it wasn't quite enough. All, or nearly all,
> >> your
> >> animals that ran since still seem to be failing in the same
Mark Wong writes:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 08:22:29AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Unfortunately it looks like it wasn't quite enough. All, or nearly all, your
>> animals that ran since still seem to be failing in the same spot...
> Oops, made another pass for python3 dev libraries.
You might
Hi,
On 2022-02-21 09:49:32 -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
> Oops, made another pass for python3 dev libraries.
Thanks!
> I can't seem to find archived ppc repos OpenSUSE Leap 43.2. I'm
> debating whether to disable python or upgrade/rebrand that animal for a
> newer SUSE release. I've stopped my cro
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 08:22:29AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022-02-19 02:00:28 +, Mark Wong wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 02:41:04PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > There's snapper ("pgbf [ a t ] twiska.com"), and there's Mark Wong's large
> > > menagerie. Mark said yes
Hi,
On 2022-02-19 02:00:28 +, Mark Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 02:41:04PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > There's snapper ("pgbf [ a t ] twiska.com"), and there's Mark Wong's large
> > menagerie. Mark said yesterday that he's working on updating.
>
> I've made one pass. Hopefully I
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 10:08:55AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-02-16 23:14:46 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I've pinged the owners of the animals failing so far:
>> - myna, butterflyfish
>
> Fixed, as noted by Micheal on this thread.
Fixed is an incorrect word here, "temporarily bypass
Hi everyone,
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 02:41:04PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> There's snapper ("pgbf [ a t ] twiska.com"), and there's Mark Wong's large
> menagerie. Mark said yesterday that he's working on updating.
I've made one pass. Hopefully I didn't make any mistakes. :)
Regards,
Mark
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-02-18 18:09:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This one was discussed on the buildfarm-owners list last month.
>> There's no 32-bit python3 on that box, and apparently no plans
>> to install one --- it sounded like the box is due for retirement
>> anyway.
> Any chance th
Hi,
On 2022-02-18 18:09:19 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > There's one further failure, but the symptoms are quite different. I've also
> > pinged its owner. I think it's a problem on the system, rather than our
> > side,
> > but less certain than with the other cases:
> > htt
Andres Freund writes:
> There's one further failure, but the symptoms are quite different. I've also
> pinged its owner. I think it's a problem on the system, rather than our side,
> but less certain than with the other cases:
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=haddock&dt=20
Hi,
Thanks to some more buildfarm animal updates things are looking better. I
think there's now only three owners that haven't updated their animals
successfully. One of which I hadn't yet pinged (chipmunk / Heikki), done now.
There's snapper ("pgbf [ a t ] twiska.com"), and there's Mark Wong's l
On 2/18/22 15:53, Andres Freund wrote:
the next run succeeded, with 'PYTHON' => 'python3' in build env. But
presumably this just was because you installed the python3-devel package?
Ok, I guess I got confused when it failed due to the missing devel
package, because I removed the PYTHON => 'py
On 2022-Feb-17, Andres Freund wrote:
> Now also pinged:
> - guaibasaurus
Fixed now (apt install python3-dev), but I had initially added
PYTHON=>python3 to the .conf, unsuccessfully because I failed to install
the dev pkg. After the first success I removed that line. It should
still work if we d
Hi,
On 2022-02-18 15:35:37 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
> Initially I just installed the python3 RPMs and when I tried running
> manually it was still error'ing on configure due to finding python2.
> Even after adding EXPORT PYTHON=python3 to my ~/.bash_profile I was seeing
> the same.
>
> By adding
On 2/18/22 15:25, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2022-02-18 14:46:39 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
$ ll /usr/bin/python
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 7 Mar 13 2021 /usr/bin/python -> python2
8<---
Yea, that all looks fine. What's the problem if you don't specify the
PYTHON=python3? We try pytho
Hi,
On 2022-02-18 14:46:39 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 2/18/22 14:37, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > That seems to have worked.
> > >
> > > But the question is, is that the correct/recommended method?
> >
> > If python3 is in PATH, then you shouldn't need that part.
>
> Not quite -- python3 is de
On 2/18/22 14:37, Andres Freund wrote:
Hi,
On 2022-02-18 14:19:49 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
On 2/17/22 13:08, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-02-16 23:14:46 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
> > > too bad.
> > - rhinoceros
>
Hi,
On 2022-02-18 14:19:49 -0500, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 2/17/22 13:08, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2022-02-16 23:14:46 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
> > > > too bad.
>
> > > - rhinoceros
> >
> > Joe replied that he is a
On 2/17/22 13:08, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2022-02-16 23:14:46 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
> too bad.
- rhinoceros
Joe replied that he is afk, looking into it tomorrow.
I installed python3 packages (initially forgettin
On 2022-02-17 19:08, Andres Freund wrote:
I've pinged the owners of the animals failing so far:
Now also pinged:
- curculio
Should be fixed by now.
I did install the python3-package but the binary was called:
/usr/local/bin/python3.5
for some reason so configure didn't pick it up.
Fixe
Hi,
On 2022-02-16 23:14:46 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> >
> > Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
> > too bad.
>
> I've pinged the owners of the animals failing so far:
Now also pinged:
- curculio
- guaibasaurus
- snapper
- gadwall, takin
> - snakefly, massasa
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 11:14:46PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> I've pinged the owners of the animals failing so far:
> - myna, butterflyfish
These two are managed by a colleague, and I have an access to them.
They should get back to green quickly now, if I did not mess up..
--
Michael
signatur
Hi,
On 2022-02-16 22:52:08 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-02-16 11:58:50 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Cool, will apply 1) later today.
>
> Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
> too bad.
I've pinged the owners of the animals failing so far:
- snakefly,
On 2022-02-16 11:58:50 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Cool, will apply 1) later today.
Done. Curious how red the BF will turn out to be. Let's hope it's not
too bad.
On 2022-02-16 15:05:36 -0500, Chapman Flack wrote:
> On 02/16/22 14:58, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> "The minimum required version is Python 3.2 or
> >> later."
> >
> > I stared for a bit, and I just don't see the redundancy?
>
> "minimum ... or later" maybe?
Ah. Thanks.
On 02/16/22 14:58, Andres Freund wrote:
>> "The minimum required version is Python 3.2 or
>> later."
>
> I stared for a bit, and I just don't see the redundancy?
"minimum ... or later" maybe?
Regards,
-Chap
Hi,
On 2022-02-16 15:43:19 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 15.02.22 22:40, Andres Freund wrote:
> > 1: plpython: Reject Python 2 during build configuration.
>
> There is a bit of redundancy in the new wording in installation.sgml:
>
> "The minimum required version is Python 3.2 or
> later."
On 15.02.22 22:40, Andres Freund wrote:
1: plpython: Reject Python 2 during build configuration.
There is a bit of redundancy in the new wording in installation.sgml:
"The minimum required version is Python 3.2
or later."
There is also a small bit in install-windows.sgml that would be worth
Andres Freund writes:
> On February 14, 2022 12:48:12 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We could I guess, but does it really buy anything? I'm sure that
>> some of the buildfarm still hasn't updated their Python installation,
>> but it'll be about the same failure we'd get from the final patch.
> I gu
Hi,
On February 14, 2022 12:48:12 PM PST, Tom Lane wrote:
>Andres Freund writes:
>> On 2022-02-14 14:18:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Well, it's mid-February. Do we have a python2-removal patch
>>> that's ready to go?
>
>> I can refresh mine. Iit might be good to first reapply
>> f201da39edc -
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2022-02-14 14:18:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, it's mid-February. Do we have a python2-removal patch
>> that's ready to go?
> I can refresh mine. Iit might be good to first reapply
> f201da39edc - "Make configure prefer python3 to plain python."
> for a few days?
Hi,
On 2022-02-14 14:18:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, it's mid-February. Do we have a python2-removal patch
> that's ready to go?
I can refresh mine. Iit might be good to first reapply
f201da39edc - "Make configure prefer python3 to plain python."
for a few days?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
I wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut writes:
>> On 12.01.22 19:49, Tom Lane wrote:
> Anyway, getting back to the point: I think we should notify the
> owners ASAP and set a 30-day deadline.
>> Sure, let's do that. I don't have a buildfarm animal these days, so I'm
>> not on that list, so it would be gre
Hi,
On 2022-01-11 13:59:32 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I suspect at this point, the Meson move isn't going to happen for PostgreSQL
> 15.
Yes - I IIRC even noted early in the thread that I don't think it's realistic
to finish it in time for 15. There's just a good amount of portability hack
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 12.01.22 19:49, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anyway, getting back to the point: I think we should notify the
>> owners ASAP and set a 30-day deadline.
> Sure, let's do that. I don't have a buildfarm animal these days, so I'm
> not on that list, so it would be great if you co
On 12.01.22 19:49, Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, getting back to the point: I think we should notify the
owners ASAP and set a 30-day deadline. We should try to get this
done before the March CF starts, so it's too late for a 60-day
grace period. In any case, the worst-case scenario for an owner
is t
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 11.01.22 17:06, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Nonetheless, we need to make a recommendation to the
>> buildfarm owners about what's the minimum python3 version we intend
>> to support going forward.
> Well, the minimum supported version has always been the oldest version
> tha
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:39 AM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
> Well, the minimum supported version has always been the oldest version
> that actually works. I don't think we ever said, we support >= X, even
> though < X still actually works, about any dependency.
I think that we sometimes say that ve
On 11.01.22 17:06, Tom Lane wrote:
Nonetheless, we need to make a recommendation to the
buildfarm owners about what's the minimum python3 version we intend
to support going forward. Do we want to just set it at 3.6, with
the expectation that the meson move will happen before too long?
Well, th
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 15.11.21 19:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think we should just write to the build farm owners, we plan to drop
>> python2 support in, say, 60 days, please update your setup to use
>> python3 or disable python support.
> This discussion stalled. I think we shoul
On 15.11.21 19:52, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I think we should just write to the build farm owners, we plan to drop
python2 support in, say, 60 days, please update your setup to use
python3 or disable python support.
This discussion stalled. I think we should do *something* for
PostgreSQL 15.
On 11/16/21 11:26, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> My other machine with an old python instance is bowerbird. It has python
> 3.4 installed but not used, alongside 2.7 which is udsed. I will install
> the latest and see if that can be made to work.
>
>
bowerbird is now building with python 3.10
chee
On 11/14/21 21:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> ... btw, there's a fairly critical gating factor for any plan to drop
> python2 support: the buildfarm. I just counted, and there are exactly
> as many members running python 2.x as 3.x (49 apiece), not counting
> Windows machines that aren't running configur
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 4:12 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> > It'd only be an issue if they want to compile from source, right?
> > We're not speaking of changing the runtime prerequisites, IIUC.
>
> I'm not sure. Does it make sense to document that pl/python has
> a different Python version requirement th
On 15.11.21 20:26, Tom Lane wrote:
* Our docs claim the minimum 3.x version for pl/python itself is 3.1,
but this is unbacked by any testing; the oldest 3.x in the buildfarm
is 3.4.3 (three such animals).
I confirmed locally that 3.2.6 still works with PL/Python. I expect
that Python 3.1 also
Robert Haas writes:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 3:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
>> The info I checked said that RHEL7 originally shipped with 3.3.
> It'd only be an issue if they want to compile from source, right?
> We're not speaking of changing the runtime prerequisites, IIUC.
I'm not sure. Does it m
Hi,
On November 15, 2021 12:36:11 PM PST, Robert Haas wrote:
>It'd only be an issue if they want to compile from source, right?
>We're not speaking of changing the runtime prerequisites, IIUC.
Correct.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Hi,
On 2021-11-15 15:30:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Is RHEL7 really an issue? I only have Centos 7 around, but that has python
> > 3.6.
>
> The info I checked said that RHEL7 originally shipped with 3.3.
> I'm not sure that Red Hat would've outright replaced that, but they
> do have a notion of
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 3:30 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> The info I checked said that RHEL7 originally shipped with 3.3.
> I'm not sure that Red Hat would've outright replaced that, but they
> do have a notion of add-on "software collections", and I'm certain
> that they would have provided newer pythons
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2021-11-15 14:26:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * Meson only promises support back to python 3.6, but if that's
>> accurate it's going to be a problem for us, because there are lots
>> of live LTS distributions with older python3 (RHEL7, Solaris 11.3,
>> AIX 7.2 for starte
Hi,
Continuing the discussion from
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2146739.1637004415%40sss.pgh.pa.us
On 2021-11-15 14:26:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> * Meson only promises support back to python 3.6, but if that's
> accurate it's going to be a problem for us, because there are lots
> of li
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> If we add this test first, then all we're going to learn is probably
> that 60% of those who are currently using python2 don't have python3
> installed, and then we're still going to have to send that above email.
I don't know what fraction don't have python3 installe
On 15.11.21 19:18, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
On 2021-11-15 12:19:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I was wondering about simply probing to see if python3 exists (and if
so, what version it is exactly), as an additional configure test that
doesn't hook into anything. That would give us som
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2021-11-15 12:19:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I was wondering about simply probing to see if python3 exists (and if
>> so, what version it is exactly), as an additional configure test that
>> doesn't hook into anything. That would give us some information without
>> sud
Hi,
On 2021-11-15 12:19:51 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't think that's warranted. The existing design is that we let
> the user say which python is "python", and I do not think we should
> change that in advance of actually dropping python2 support.
Hm. I think it'd be ok, given that python 2
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2021-11-14 21:24:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (It's likely that some fraction of them do already have python3 installed,
>> in which case the search order change Peter recommended would be enough to
>> fix it. But I'm sure not all do.)
> How about committing the order
Hi,
On 2021-11-14 21:24:31 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> ... btw, there's a fairly critical gating factor for any plan to drop
> python2 support: the buildfarm. I just counted, and there are exactly
> as many members running python 2.x as 3.x (49 apiece), not counting
> Windows machines that aren't ru
... btw, there's a fairly critical gating factor for any plan to drop
python2 support: the buildfarm. I just counted, and there are exactly
as many members running python 2.x as 3.x (49 apiece), not counting
Windows machines that aren't running configure. We can't commit
something that's going to
On 04.11.21 20:54, Andres Freund wrote:
Finally, morally related, there is some Python 2/3 compat code in
contrib/unaccent/generate_unaccent_rules.py that could be removed. Also,
arguably, change the shebang line in that script.
Hm. So far the python used for plpython and python for code genera
Andres Freund writes:
> Another thing I wondered about is what we want to do with the extension
> names. Do we want to leave it named plpython3u? Do we want to have a plpython
> that depends on plpython3u?
I think we want to keep plpython3u. Maybe we can point plpythonu
at that, but I'm concerne
Hi,
On 2021-11-04 19:58:54 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I see you have posted a patch for this in the meson thread
> (https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/127770/v5-0003-plpython-Drop-support-python2.patch).
Yea, I was planning to post that here after a bit more polish. I mostly
I see you have posted a patch for this in the meson thread
(https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/127770/v5-0003-plpython-Drop-support-python2.patch).
Here is my review of that.
I would change the search order in configure from
PGAC_PATH_PROGS(PYTHON, [python python3 python2])
to
On 31.10.21 19:45, Andres Freund wrote:
To me it seems time to drop plpython2 support. Supporting plpython2
until ~7 years after python2 is EOL is already quite long... It'd be one
thing if it were completely painless, but imo it's not.
I was about to list better plpython2/3 support (including t
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 8:05 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Yeah, it's a bit hard to justify continuing support in HEAD.
+1, it's dropping out of distros, it'd be unsupportable without
unreasonable effort.
Hi,
On 2021-10-31 14:49:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > To me it seems time to drop plpython2 support. Supporting plpython2
> > until ~7 years after python2 is EOL is already quite long... It'd be one
> > thing if it were completely painless, but imo it's not.
>
> 7 years?
Andres Freund writes:
> To me it seems time to drop plpython2 support. Supporting plpython2
> until ~7 years after python2 is EOL is already quite long... It'd be one
> thing if it were completely painless, but imo it's not.
7 years? Oh, you're envisioning dropping plpython2 in HEAD but keeping
81 matches
Mail list logo
