On 9/18/20 4:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 9/18/20 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I intentionally let that happen, figuring that it'd be good to get some >>> buildfarm cycles on the new code in pg_upgrade that does this check. >>> But now we have to think about updating the test. I think the best >>> bet is just to add some DROP OPERATOR commands to the existing >>> cleanup logic in TestUpgradeXversion.pm. It looks like this would >>> do the trick: >>> >>> drop operator #@# (bigint,NONE); >>> drop operator #%# (bigint,NONE); >>> drop operator !=- (bigint,NONE); >>> drop operator #@%# (bigint,NONE); >> Almost. I had to remove one more operator. > Hmm, that's not a postfix operator ... oh, it's because it depends on the > numeric_fac function alias which we also removed. We could eliminate > the need to drop it if we changed the definition to use "factorial" > instead of "numeric_fac" in all the back branches. Not sure if that's > a better solution or not. Might be worth doing, because in the older > branches that's the only user-defined prefix operator, so we're missing > some pg_upgrade test coverage if we just drop it. > >
Yeah, probably worth doing. It's a small enough change and it's only in the test suite. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
