Skip to content

Commit 749ea5f

Browse files
committed
ci: document the pg-upgrade-stepwise known failure in-repo
Move the _sentry_mv / binary-pg_upgrade root-cause analysis into a code comment on the job itself, so it's visible to anyone reading ci.yml directly, not just in the PR description.
1 parent 792aa43 commit 749ea5f

1 file changed

Lines changed: 16 additions & 0 deletions

File tree

.github/workflows/ci.yml

Lines changed: 16 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -252,6 +252,22 @@ jobs:
252252
# version through any step of the climb), then binary-pg_upgrades one
253253
# major at a time through the rest of the range, running the full suite
254254
# (existing mode) and re-proving the dependency guard after EVERY step.
255+
#
256+
# KNOWN FAILING as of PR #19: the very first climb step (12 -> 13) already
257+
# fails restoring the new cluster's schema --
258+
# `REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW "_object_reference"."_sentry_mv"` errors
259+
# `pg_class heap OID value not set when in binary upgrade mode`. Confirmed
260+
# general (reproduced with a bare non-extension materialized view against
261+
# a scratch cluster started with postgres's own `-b` flag, no extension
262+
# involved) -- a REFRESH creates a new heap, and nothing pre-assigns it a
263+
# binary-upgrade OID the way pg_dump's own generated CREATE MATERIALIZED
264+
# VIEW ... WITH NO DATA statements do, so pg_extension_config_dump() on a
265+
# materialized view cannot survive binary pg_upgrade. _sentry_mv is marked
266+
# that way deliberately (it forces object_reference.post_restore()'s
267+
# OID-repair logic to re-run on any restore that doesn't itself re-run
268+
# CREATE EXTENSION), so fixing this needs a maintainer decision on how to
269+
# preserve that guarantee some other way -- see PR #19 for the fix
270+
# directions considered so far.
255271
pg-upgrade-stepwise:
256272
# Gated behind test, not just changes -- see extension-update-test's
257273
# needs comment above: every leg here would fail anyway against an

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)