Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing
От | Jim Jones |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6d146918-dbd6-4de2-bdd1-80471c1e0053@uni-muenster.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Missing [NO] INDENT flag in XMLSerialize backward parsing
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Michael & Andrew On 21.02.25 11:46, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> On Feb 21, 2025, at 4:55 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 04:36:07AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> The fix has broken cross version upgrade test. Maybe we need to filter out >>> NO INDENT in releases prior to 16 in AdjustUpgrade.pm?s >> Yes, I was just looking at that. The regex I am finishing with in >> AdjustUpgrade.pm is something like that, which is enough to discard >> the NO INDENT clause in an XMLSERIALIZE: >> --- src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade.pm >> +++ src/test/perl/PostgreSQL/Test/AdjustUpgrade >> @@ -628,6 +628,12 @@ sub adjust_new_dumpfile >> \s+FUNCTION\s2\s\(text,\stext\)\spublic\.part_hashtext_length\(text,bigint\);} {}mxg; >> } >> >> + # pre-v16 dumps do not know about XMLSERIALIZE(NO INDENT). >> + if ($old_version < 16) >> + { >> + $dump =~ s/XMLSERIALIZE\((.*)? NO INDENT\)/XMLSERIALIZE\($1\)/mg; >> + } >> >> This needs to be applied in adjust_new_dumpfile() so as the comparison >> with the old dump will be stable, is that right? > I think so. Looks good to me Thanks for the quick response! For future reference, what’s the best way to verify this myself? The buildfarm was all green. Best regards, Jim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: