Re: BUG #16045: vacuum_db crash and illegal memory alloc after pg_upgrade from PG11 to PG12

Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, buschmann@nidsa.net, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2019-10-16T13:41:17Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Move into separate file all the SQL queries used in pg_upgrade tests

  2. Add table to regression tests for binary-compatibility checks in pg_upgrade

  3. Fix tests of pg_upgrade across different major versions

  4. Multirange datatypes

  5. Work around cross-version-upgrade issues created by commit 9e38c2bb5.

  6. Declare assorted array functions using anycompatible not anyelement.

  7. Remove factorial operators, leaving only the factorial() function.

  8. Create by default sql/ and expected/ for output directory in pg_regress

  9. Add missing include to pg_upgrade/version.c

  10. Improve the check for pg_catalog.line data type in pg_upgrade

  11. Improve the check for pg_catalog.unknown data type in pg_upgrade

  12. Check for tables with sql_identifier during pg_upgrade

  13. pg_upgrade: clarify the database names in error files

  14. In the pg_upgrade test suite, don't write to src/test/regress.

  15. Allow group access on PGDATA

  16. Refactor dir/file permissions

  17. Remove unused functions in regress.c.

  18. Make WAL segment size configurable at initdb time.

  19. Fix bit-rot in pg_upgrade's test.sh, and improve documentation.

On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:26:42PM +0200, Tom Lane wrote:
>I wrote:
>> Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>> I've just committed and pushed both fixes after some minor corrections.
>
>> Not quite right in 9.6 and before, according to crake.  Looks like
>> some issue with the CppAsString2'd constants?  Did we even have
>> CppAsString2 that far back?
>
>Yeah, we did.  On closer inspection I suspect that we need to #include
>some other file to get the RELKIND_ constants in the old branches.
>

Oh! Looking.

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services