Re: [HACKERS] removing abstime, reltime, tinterval.c, spi/timetravel
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Date: 2018-10-11T21:00:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, On 2018-10-11 16:57:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > I've done that now, together with two commits for removal of timetravel > > and abstime, reltime, tinterval. > > Unsurprisingly-in-retrospect, buildfarm member crake is now bitching > that cross-version pg_upgrade fails, since it's trying to test importing > back-branch regression DBs that contain tables with the desupported types. > > Perhaps the best fix for this is to teach the cross-version-upgrade > buildfarm module to drop the affected tables from the old DB before > testing pg_upgrade. However, that does nothing to help manual testing > of similar scenarios. > > Another idea would be to put table drops into the back branch regression > tests, so that their ending states don't include any such tables. That > would cripple pg_dump testing of these types in the back branches, but > I'm not sure if we really care much. I think the latter is the better choice. Given the code for those types hasn't changed meaningfully in the last decade, I think not having pg_dump coverage would be ok. > I don't especially like either of these choices --- anyone got another > idea? Nope :( Greetings, Andres Freund
Commits
-
Clean up/tighten up coercibility checks in opr_sanity regression test.
- e9f42d529f99 12.0 landed
-
Remove abstime, reltime, tinterval tables from old regression databases.
- fb583c80d230 9.3.25 landed
- 7b88c1ddd049 9.4.20 landed
- 9320263ae7ca 10.6 landed
- 43cc4e49edff 9.5.15 landed
- 2ad422ce10a4 9.6.11 landed
- 184951a48a10 11.0 landed