On Fri, 21 Oct 2022 at 11:31, Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 09:23:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Hmmm ... I'd tend to do SELECT COUNT(*) FROM. But can't we provide > > any actual checks on the sanity of the output? I realize that the > > output's far from static, but still ... > > Honestly, checking all the fields is not that exciting, but the > maximum I can think of that would be portable enough is something like > the attached. No arithmetic operators for xid limits things a bit, > but at least that's something. > > Thoughts?
The patch does not apply on top of HEAD as in [1], please post a rebased patch: === Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID 33ab0a2a527e3af5beee3a98fc07201e555d6e45 === === applying patch ./controldata-regression-2.patch patching file src/test/regress/expected/misc_functions.out Hunk #1 succeeded at 642 with fuzz 2 (offset 48 lines). patching file src/test/regress/sql/misc_functions.sql Hunk #1 FAILED at 223. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/test/regress/sql/misc_functions.sql.rej [1] - http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_41_3711.log Regards, Vignesh
