Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 08:31:43 +0000
From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3
Message-ID: <ZkRy73Q2NDBT0Avq@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
References: <ZidAHRJyMzPZ5JtJ@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <Ziff3vGRKv1LUjY7@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <ZijE6UBCo02U2TXJ@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <62310067-6dc4-97ab-6724-7d3602b5056d@gmail.com>
 <ZinjZmaMEEkOSfZ0@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <403075e1-4d60-09e2-a06a-749cd9d88f66@gmail.com>
 <ZioEJafHC95wjfMk@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <d815344e-a6a2-617a-d35f-012e5e89f29f@gmail.com>
 <Zjy/o3t/26exwj5Z@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <ZkQMYVxbOxFD0519@paquier.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZkQMYVxbOxFD0519@paquier.xyz>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ZkRy73Q2NDBT0Avq%40ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:14:09AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:20:51PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Oh I see, your test updates an existing dependency. v4 took care about brand new 
> > dependencies creation (recordMultipleDependencies()) but forgot to take care
> > about changing an existing dependency (which is done in another code path:
> > changeDependencyFor()).
> > 
> > Please find attached v5 that adds:
> > 
> > - a call to the new depLockAndCheckObject() function in changeDependencyFor().
> > - a test when altering an existing dependency.
> > 
> > With v5 applied, I don't see the issue anymore.
> 
> +            if (object_description)
> +                ereport(ERROR, errmsg("%s does not exist", object_description));
> +            else
> +                ereport(ERROR, errmsg("a dependent object does not ex
> 
> This generates an internal error code.  Is that intended?

Thanks for looking at it!

Yes, it's like when say you want to create an object in a schema that does not
exist (see get_namespace_oid()).

> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/src/test/modules/test_dependencies_locks/specs/test_dependencies_locks.spec 
> 
> This introduces a module with only one single spec.  I could get
> behind an extra module if splitting the tests into more specs makes
> sense or if there is a restriction on installcheck.  However, for 
> one spec file filed with a bunch of objects, and note that I'm OK to
> let this single spec grow more for this range of tests, it seems to me
> that this would be better under src/test/isolation/.

Yeah, I was not sure about this one (the location is from take 2 mentioned
up-thread). I'll look at moving the tests to src/test/isolation/.

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com