Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFcNs+pJ6_Ud-zg3vY_Y0mzfESdM34Humt8avKrAKq_H+v18Cg@mail.gmail.com
Source-Git-URL: git://git.postgresql.org/git/pgtranslation/messages.git Source-Git-Hash: bb30ba75db8403a9ce4fb8ba6b7c3fe42ac4069e
Author: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
This was erroneously removed in 55a70a023c3daefca9bbd68bfbe6862af10ab479.
2cd70845240 / c6293249d change the way individual attributes in a TupleDesc are stored / accessed. To reduce the effort of making extensions compatible with postgresql 11, and to ease future backpatching, backpatch introduction of TupleDescAttr() to all releases. Do not backpatch change in storage, as that'd be a breaking change for existing and working extensions. Author: Andres Freund Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20170820181723.tdswdinzptbcwhrr@alap3.anarazel.de Backpatch: 9.2-
Commit 3eb9a5e7c unintentionally introduced an ordering dependency into restore_toc_entries_prefork(). The existing coding of reduce_dependencies() contains a check to skip moving a TOC entry to the ready_list if it wasn't initially in the pending_list. This used to suffice to prevent reduce_dependencies() from trying to move anything into the ready_list during restore_toc_entries_prefork(), because the pending_list stayed empty throughout that phase; but it no longer does. The problem doesn't manifest unless the TOC has been reordered by SortTocFromFile, which is how I missed it in testing. To fix, just add a test for ready_list == NULL, converting the call with NULL from a poor man's sanity check into an explicit command not to touch TOC items' list membership. Clarify some of the comments around this; in particular, note the primary purpose of the check for pending_list membership, which is to ensure that we can't try to restore the same item twice, in case a TOC list forces it to be restored before its dependency count goes to zero. Per report from FabrÃzio de Royes Mello. Back-patch to 9.3, like the previous commit. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFcNs+pjuv0JL_x4+=71TPUPjdLHOXA4YfT32myj_OrrZb4ohA@mail.gmail.com
It now emerges that we can only rely on Perl to tell us we must use -D_USE_32BIT_TIME_T if it's Perl 5.13.4 or later. For older versions, revert to our previous practice of assuming we need that symbol in all 32-bit Windows builds. This is not ideal, but inquiring into which compiler version Perl was built with seems far too fragile. In any case, we had not previously had complaints about these old Perl versions, so let's assume this is Good Enough. (It's still better than the situation ante commit 5a5c2feca, in that at least the effects are confined to PL/Perl rather than the whole PG build.) Back-patch to all supported versions, like 5a5c2feca and predecessors. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CANFyU97OVQ3+Mzfmt3MhuUm5NwPU=-FtbNH5Eb7nZL9ua8=rcA@mail.gmail.com