potentially missed pgindent in REL_19_STABLE
Hi,
I wonder if I'm the only one seeing $subject, like this:
diff --git a/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c b/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c
index 6fb31430a3a..e98bb1ae450 100644
--- a/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c
+++ b/src/backend/utils/adt/varlena.c
@@ -4716,9 +4716,10 @@ text_right(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
if (n < 0)
{
/*
- * Negating PG_INT32_MIN would overflow, so clamp instead. Any n whose
- * absolute value is at least the string's length skips the whole
- * string, and len can't exceed PG_INT32_MAX, so this is equivalent.
+ * Negating PG_INT32_MIN would overflow, so clamp instead. Any n
+ * whose absolute value is at least the string's length skips the
+ * whole string, and len can't exceed PG_INT32_MAX, so this is
+ * equivalent.
*/
if (unlikely(n == PG_INT32_MIN))
n = PG_INT32_MAX;Does anyone object to applying the attached to fix that?
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
Attachments:
REL_19_STABLE-pgindent.patchapplication/octet-stream; name=REL_19_STABLE-pgindent.patchDownload+4-3
On 24 Sep 2026, at 10:23, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder if I'm the only one seeing $subject, like this:
...
Does anyone object to applying the attached to fix that?
I did see it, but it was during a freeze and then it slipped my mind. Shipping
a pgindent clean tree clearly has value, will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:33 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026, at 10:23, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder if I'm the only one seeing $subject, like this:
...
Does anyone object to applying the attached to fix that?I did see it, but it was during a freeze and then it slipped my mind. Shipping
a pgindent clean tree clearly has value,
I hadn't realized that koel's pgindent check only covers master. I run
pgindent on each branch before pushing, so I noticed this hunk a few
times recently and thought I'd ask.
will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?
That's a good question. src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES mentions runs before
beta and before branching, but I couldn't find anything about a final
run before .0.
I'm happy to hold off if another run is planned, or if we don't think
this cleanup is needed for 19.0.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
On 24 Sep 2026, at 12:28, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:33 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026, at 10:23, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder if I'm the only one seeing $subject, like this:
...
Does anyone object to applying the attached to fix that?I did see it, but it was during a freeze and then it slipped my mind. Shipping
a pgindent clean tree clearly has value,I hadn't realized that koel's pgindent check only covers master. I run
pgindent on each branch before pushing, so I noticed this hunk a few
times recently and thought I'd ask.
Same here, I have no explanation for why I missed this time =/.
will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?That's a good question. src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES mentions runs before
beta and before branching, but I couldn't find anything about a final
run before .0.I'm happy to hold off if another run is planned, or if we don't think
this cleanup is needed for 19.0.
Perhaps it's best to do it now to make sure it isn't lost again, but I have no
strong opinions.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 8:28 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026, at 12:28, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:33 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
On 24 Sep 2026, at 10:23, Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder if I'm the only one seeing $subject, like this:
...
Does anyone object to applying the attached to fix that?I did see it, but it was during a freeze and then it slipped my mind. Shipping
a pgindent clean tree clearly has value,I hadn't realized that koel's pgindent check only covers master. I run
pgindent on each branch before pushing, so I noticed this hunk a few
times recently and thought I'd ask.Same here, I have no explanation for why I missed this time =/.
will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?That's a good question. src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES mentions runs before
beta and before branching, but I couldn't find anything about a final
run before .0.I'm happy to hold off if another run is planned, or if we don't think
this cleanup is needed for 19.0.Perhaps it's best to do it now to make sure it isn't lost again, but I have no
strong opinions.
OK, I'll push this tomorrow unless there are any objections. Thanks
for chiming in.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:33 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?
That's a good question. src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES mentions runs before
beta and before branching, but I couldn't find anything about a final
run before .0.
We haven't done that in the past, and in general I don't think
it's policy to expect full pgindent cleanliness in back branches.
One reason for that is that back-patches typically retain the
master-branch patch's formatting, even if an older version of
pgindent would have done something different with some constructs.
For instance, commit b518ba4af affected a lot of places, making it
hard to say which handling of "..." is right for pre-v19. So now
you'd likely get diffs from a tree-wide reindent in v18 and before
no matter which pgindent version you used.
I have no objection to applying the proposed patch, though.
At this point there's still value in avoiding unnecessary
diffs between v19 and v20.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 11:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:33 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
will there would be a tree-wide
pgindent run before tagging REL_19_0?That's a good question. src/tools/RELEASE_CHANGES mentions runs before
beta and before branching, but I couldn't find anything about a final
run before .0.We haven't done that in the past, and in general I don't think
it's policy to expect full pgindent cleanliness in back branches.
One reason for that is that back-patches typically retain the
master-branch patch's formatting, even if an older version of
pgindent would have done something different with some constructs.For instance, commit b518ba4af affected a lot of places, making it
hard to say which handling of "..." is right for pre-v19. So now
you'd likely get diffs from a tree-wide reindent in v18 and before
no matter which pgindent version you used.I have no objection to applying the proposed patch, though.
At this point there's still value in avoiding unnecessary
diffs between v19 and v20.
Thanks, applied.
--
Thanks, Amit Langote