Thread
Commits
-
Port regress-python3-mangle.mk to Solaris "sed", redux.
- ec20545b20de 12.13 landed
- cc0e506a6410 11.18 landed
- 02d060d0f75b 10.23 landed
-
Port regress-python3-mangle.mk to Solaris "sed".
- c3556f6fac34 14.0 cited
-
Solaris "sed" versus pre-v13 plpython tests
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2022-08-31T22:25:01Z
I noticed that buildfarm member margay, which just recently started running tests on REL_12_STABLE, is failing the plpython tests in that branch [1], though it's happy in v13 and later. The failures appear due to syntax errors in Python "except" statements, and it's visible in some of the tests that we are failing to convert ancient Python "except" syntax to what Python 3 wants: diff -U3 /home/marcel/build-farm-14/buildroot/REL_12_STABLE/pgsql.build/src/pl/plpython/expected/python3/plpython_types_3.out /home/marcel/build-farm-14/buildroot/REL_12_STABLE/pgsql.build/src/pl/plpython/results/python3/plpython_types.out --- /home/marcel/build-farm-14/buildroot/REL_12_STABLE/pgsql.build/src/pl/plpython/expected/python3/plpython_types_3.out 2022-08-31 22:29:51.070597370 +0200 +++ /home/marcel/build-farm-14/buildroot/REL_12_STABLE/pgsql.build/src/pl/plpython/results/python3/plpython_types.out 2022-08-31 22:29:53.053544840 +0200 @@ -400,15 +400,16 @@ import marshal try: return marshal.loads(x) -except ValueError as e: +except ValueError, e: return 'FAILED: ' + str(e) $$ LANGUAGE plpython3u; +ERROR: could not compile PL/Python function "test_type_unmarshal" +DETAIL: SyntaxError: invalid syntax (<string>, line 6) So it would seem that regress-python3-mangle.mk's sed command to perform this transformation isn't working on margay's sed. We've had to hack regress-python3-mangle.mk for Solaris "sed" before (cf commit c3556f6fa). This seems to be another instance of that same crummy implementation of '*' patterns. I suppose Noah missed this angle at the time because the problematic pattern had already been removed in v13 and up (45223fd9c). But it's still there in v12. I am not completely sure why buildfarm member wrasse isn't failing similarly, but a likely theory is that Noah has got some other sed in his search path there. I confirmed on the gcc farm's Solaris 11 box that the pattern doesn't work as expected with /usr/bin/sed: tgl@gcc-solaris11:~$ echo except foo, bar: | sed -e 's/except \([[:alpha:]][[:alpha:].]*\), *\([[:alpha:]][[:alpha:]]*\):/except \1 as \2:/g' except foo, bar: We could perhaps do this instead: $ echo except foo, bar: | sed -e '/^ *except.*,.*: *$/s/, / as /g' except foo as bar: It's a little bit more brittle, but Python doesn't allow any other commands on the same line does it? Another idea is to try to find some other sed to use. I see that configure already does that on most platforms, because ax_pthread.m4 has "AC_REQUIRE([AC_PROG_SED])". But if there's still someone out there using --disable-thread-safety, they might think this is an annoying movement of the build-requirements goalposts. regards, tom lane [1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=margay&dt=2022-08-31%2020%3A00%3A05 -
Re: Solaris "sed" versus pre-v13 plpython tests
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2022-09-01T00:57:22Z
I wrote: > I confirmed on the gcc farm's Solaris 11 box that the pattern > doesn't work as expected with /usr/bin/sed: > tgl@gcc-solaris11:~$ echo except foo, bar: | sed -e 's/except \([[:alpha:]][[:alpha:].]*\), *\([[:alpha:]][[:alpha:]]*\):/except \1 as \2:/g' > except foo, bar: > We could perhaps do this instead: > $ echo except foo, bar: | sed -e '/^ *except.*,.*: *$/s/, / as /g' > except foo as bar: > It's a little bit more brittle, but Python doesn't allow any other > commands on the same line does it? Oh ... after a bit more experimentation, there's an easier way. Apparently the real problem is that Solaris' sed doesn't handle [[:alpha:]] (I wonder if this is locale-dependent?). I get correct results after expanding it manually, eg tgl@gcc-solaris11:~$ echo except foo, bar: | sed -e 's/except \([a-z][a-z.]*\), *\([a-z][a-zA-Z]*\):/except \1 as \2:/g' except foo as bar: We aren't likely to need anything beyond a-zA-Z and maybe 0-9, so I'll go fix it that way. regards, tom lane
-
Re: Solaris "sed" versus pre-v13 plpython tests
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> — 2022-09-01T04:25:55Z
On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 06:25:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I am not completely sure why buildfarm member wrasse isn't failing > similarly wrasse disabled plpython in v12-, from day one, due to this and a crash bug that I shelved. I will be interested to see how margay reacts to your fix.
-
Re: Solaris "sed" versus pre-v13 plpython tests
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> — 2022-09-01T09:10:35Z
On 2022-Aug-31, Noah Misch wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 06:25:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > I am not completely sure why buildfarm member wrasse isn't failing > > similarly > > wrasse disabled plpython in v12-, from day one, due to this and a crash bug > that I shelved. I will be interested to see how margay reacts to your fix. It turned green two hours ago. Yay :-) -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
-
Re: Solaris "sed" versus pre-v13 plpython tests
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> — 2022-09-03T15:43:57Z
On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 11:10:35AM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2022-Aug-31, Noah Misch wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 06:25:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > > I am not completely sure why buildfarm member wrasse isn't failing > > > similarly > > > > wrasse disabled plpython in v12-, from day one, due to this and a crash bug > > that I shelved. I will be interested to see how margay reacts to your fix. > > It turned green two hours ago. Yay :-) Excellent. I can no longer reproduce the crash bug, so I enabled plpython on wrasse v10,v11,v12.