!aGqRytqbCECitOFhbt:nixos.org

Release Management

342 Members
Release schedule: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/193585 | Feature Freeze: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/194208 | Blockers: https://github.com/orgs/NixOS/projects/1391 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
10 Nov 2023
@julienmalka:matrix.org@julienmalka:matrix.orgCurrently if we remove the ensure* options a lot of nixos modules are going to be broken no ?19:23:47
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius
In reply to @julienmalka:matrix.org
I we reverted the default postgresql version to 14, the impacted users would be everyone that run nixos-unstable right ?
Let's assume we do this
19:52:41
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusWe would break anyone PGSQL 15 deployment19:52:46
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusBecause you have to downgrade the PG15 folder now19:52:53
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius
In reply to @julienmalka:matrix.org
What if we remove the default value for postgresql, forcing users to be mindful about the versions they use ? Migrated users could then use version 15 and new users version 14. We would have to also have an assert that ensure* is used only with version 14.
This is orthogonal to the situation
19:53:01
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezarius
In reply to @julienmalka:matrix.org
Currently if we remove the ensure* options a lot of nixos modules are going to be broken no ?
No, because the modules are migrated in the PR
19:53:07
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusOnly out of tree modules would be broken19:53:12
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusI don't know if the cost of breaking everyone on PG15 is higher or lower than the cost of breaking every out of tree modules with ensurePermission options19:55:41
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusMy view is that the former has higher cost because I don't think a lot of people understand well PostgreSQL to understand how to downgrade their state data (you have to pg_dumpall everything and re-import, if you don't have enough working memory to do it, good luck)19:56:34
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusThe latter is just cheap people have to figure out stuff or block their upgrades19:56:44
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusTherefore, revert is still out of the question to me, but I am open to be proven wrong19:56:59
@bendlas:matrix.orgbendlas joined the room.19:59:00
@bendlas:matrix.orgbendlas👋19:59:17
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusI have to jump in another meeting right now19:59:49
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusI will people chime in / discuss on issues here and there19:59:56
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusI'd like to come to a "pre-decision" on Monday ideally that we will announce in Discourse20:00:12
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusAnd then we will enforce it20:00:17
@bendlas:matrix.orgbendlas
In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
We would break anyone PGSQL 15 deployment
That would be unfortunate for sure. But the way the problem seems to present itself, it's a judgement call between breaking unstable users (with the option of re-upgrading the default or downgrading the folder) or breaking stable out-of-tree users (with no option of downgrading).
20:10:20
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusWell stable out of tree users have a downgrading option20:11:05
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusThey stay on 23.05 and figure out what they want to do20:11:10
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusPlus they have a proper warning20:11:17
@raitobezarius:matrix.orgraitobezariusWhereas unstable users doesn't have any option to downgrade because it will silently break the postgresql.service20:11:41
@bendlas:matrix.orgbendlasdowngrading within the release, but point taken20:11:51
@bendlas:matrix.orgbendlasWhat actually is the behavior of postgres when started on a folder that's "too new"? Maybe this condition could be checked for, if not at build time, ....20:14:09
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaso, what I read is that downgrades are not supported by postgresql20:14:23
@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.events@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.events joined the room.20:14:27
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaso people who are on 15 now and want back to 14 would need to dump and restore20:14:36
@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.events@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.eventsApologize for upgrading postgres version... I migrated from 14 to 15 and everything worked fine, didn't know that it'll break new installations20:16:00
@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.events@gary.garyguo.net:lpc.events
In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
This is orthogonal to the situation
How about remove the default if stateVersion is 23.11, but keep it for older ones?
20:18:42
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaMy problem with that PR is that it didn't account for the changelog of postgresl 15. This goes well 500 times and then 1 time it will bite you.20:19:28

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6