Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 20:23:58 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Nitin Motiani <nitinmotiani@google.com>,
	Hannu Krosing <hannuk@google.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade: transfer pg_largeobject_metadata's files when
 possible
Message-ID: <aLo7rnQ8MbPK2dGH@nathan>
References: <aJ3_Gih_XW1_O2HF@nathan>
 <aLU7AhUFhsJEJ1xB@paquier.xyz>
 <aLcCnNkWtQZ5YQOF@nathan>
 <aLkcuKPYaLJ4RipR@paquier.xyz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="FuG7Wvwo8mkbkV/T"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <aLkcuKPYaLJ4RipR@paquier.xyz>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aLo7rnQ8MbPK2dGH%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk


--FuG7Wvwo8mkbkV/T
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 01:59:36PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 09:43:40AM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> Do you think a new pg_upgrade test for security labels is worth the
>> trouble?  It seems doable, but it'd be an awfully expensive test for this.
>> On the other hand, I'm not sure there's any coverage for pg_upgrade with
>> security labels, so perhaps this is a good time to establish some tests.
> 
> I would argue in favor of these additions.  Security labels are not
> the most popular thing ever, AFAIK, but your patch makes the need more
> relevant to have.  The cheapest approach would be to add a LO creation
> pattern in src/bin/pg_dump/t/002_pg_dump.pl, with an EXTRA_INSTALL
> pointing at src/test/modules/dummy_seclabel/ to be able to create the
> security label (we already do that in pg_upgrade and pg_basebackup so
> the trick works).  That should be enough to make sure that the binary
> upgrade dumps have the seclabel data included.  It's a bit funky, I
> agree.  So if you think that this is not worth the test cycles, I
> won't push hard on this point, either.

Ah, I'd forgotten about EXTRA_INSTALL.  That simplifies things.  There's
enough special handling for large objects in pg_upgrade that I think we
ought to test it end-to-end, so I sneaked it into 006_tranfer_modes.pl.
WDYT?

-- 
nathan

--FuG7Wvwo8mkbkV/T
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=v2-0001-pg_upgrade-Transfer-pg_largeobject_metadata-s-fil.patch
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit