From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
        pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade test writes to source directory
In-reply-to: <YpAMBqPrusng47e0@paquier.xyz>
References: <f80ace33-11fb-1cd3-20f8-98f51d151088@enterprisedb.com>
 <Yo3Z5JzHXn7sIe9N@paquier.xyz>
 <b68a2c98-8690-c057-c9e1-79bc6db608a0@enterprisedb.com>
 <Yo/mWGJjCHOH3eB1@paquier.xyz> <20220526205218.GC19626@telsasoft.com>
 <Yo/5MlXbwY4UhMnm@paquier.xyz> <2464542.1653603596@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <YpAMBqPrusng47e0@paquier.xyz>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
	message dated "Fri, 27 May 2022 08:23:50 +0900"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2480062.1653609068.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 19:51:08 -0400
Message-ID: <2480063.1653609068@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2480063.1653609068%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 06:19:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It looks like that patch is meant to resolve misbehaviors equivalent to
>> this one that already exist in several other places.  So fixing this
>> one along with the other ones seems like an appropriate thing to do
>> when that lands.

> Well, would this specific change land in REL_15_STABLE?

I wouldn't object to doing that, and even back-patching.  It looked
like a pretty sane change, and we've learned before that skimping on
back-branch test infrastructure is a poor tradeoff.

			regards, tom lane