From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com>
Cc: Christophe Pettus <christophe.pettus@pgexperts.com>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 17:14:19 -0400
Message-ID: <20170926211419.GB7167@momjian.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12792.1506456422@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <25809.1506348877@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<b2890b9d-2383-955f-786c-8e252dce04cb@2ndQuadrant.com>
<27064.1506350579@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<5f4f29bf-90b1-e49a-6cf9-069c59bc1067@2ndQuadrant.com>
<40FDB1F3-932D-4912-B4C7-F1E26E331079@justatheory.com>
<1090.1506365074@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<9666.1506446327@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<329.1506451066@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<38835cdd-!c378-8d7a-013b-fd733c78c649@2ndQuadrant.com>
<12792.1506456422@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 04:07:02PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > On 09/26/2017 02:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... and the buildfarm's not too happy. It looks like force_parallel_mode
> >> breaks all the regression test cases around unsafe enums; which on
> >> reflection is unsurprising, because parallel workers will not have access
> >> to the parent's blacklist hash, so they will think unsafe values are safe.
>
> > I think I would mark enum_in and friends as parallel-restricted. Yes I
> > know it would involve a cat version bump, so I'll understand if that's
> > not acceptable, but it seems to me the best of a bad bunch of choices.
> > Second choice might be turning off parallel mode if the hash exists, but
> > I'm unclear how that would work.
>
> Meh. I'm starting to slide back to my original opinion that we should
> revert back to 9.6 behavior. Even if a post-RC1 catversion bump is OK,
> making these sorts of changes a week before GA is not comfort inducing.
> I'm losing faith that we've thought through the issue thoroughly, and
> there's no longer time to catch any remaining oversights through testing.
>
> Any other votes out there?
Well, I was concerned yesterday that we had a broken build farm so close
to release. (I got consistent regression failures.) I think PG 11 would
be better for this feature change, so I support reverting this.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: bruce@momjian.us, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com, david@justatheory.com, christophe.pettus@pgexperts.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #14825: enum type: unsafe use?
In-Reply-To: <20170926211419.GB7167@momjian.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox