-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
libpq: init at 17.2 #359659
Open
wolfgangwalther
wants to merge
5
commits into
NixOS:staging
Choose a base branch
from
wolfgangwalther:postgresql-libpq
base: staging
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
libpq: init at 17.2 #359659
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
6.topic: python
6.topic: qt/kde
6.topic: rust
6.topic: ruby
6.topic: ocaml
6.topic: lua
6.topic: games
6.topic: php
6.topic: continuous integration
Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions
labels
Nov 27, 2024
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
from
November 27, 2024 20:17
d97ea3c
to
ca6dc81
Compare
nix-owners
bot
requested review from
aanderse,
drupol,
figsoda,
globin,
infinisil,
jtojnar,
K900,
Ma27,
mmahut,
NickCao,
philiptaron,
RaghavSood,
SuperSandro2000,
talyz and
thoughtpolice
November 27, 2024 20:18
ofborg
bot
added
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Nov 28, 2024
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
2 times, most recently
from
November 28, 2024 18:48
1eb5366
to
862bd30
Compare
wolfgangwalther
removed
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Nov 28, 2024
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
from
November 28, 2024 19:01
862bd30
to
10eca45
Compare
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
from
December 14, 2024 15:01
9332168
to
bb88f6d
Compare
Rebased to resolve the many merge conflicts after nixfmt has been run on a lot files in the meantime. @Ma27 will still review, so not ready, yet. |
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
2 times, most recently
from
December 14, 2024 15:09
aa9fe51
to
b6a4e7c
Compare
philiptaron
approved these changes
Dec 14, 2024
wegank
added
12.approvals: 2
This PR was reviewed and approved by two reputable people
and removed
12.approvals: 1
This PR was reviewed and approved by one reputable person
labels
Dec 15, 2024
ofborg
bot
added
10.rebuild-darwin: 501+
10.rebuild-linux: 501+
and removed
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
labels
Dec 15, 2024
wegank
added
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Dec 31, 2024
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
from
January 1, 2025 15:43
b6a4e7c
to
7ab2b37
Compare
Rebased to resolve merge conflicts. |
wolfgangwalther
removed
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Jan 1, 2025
wegank
removed
the
12.approvals: 2
This PR was reviewed and approved by two reputable people
label
Jan 1, 2025
I promise, I haven't forgotten about that, I'll do my best to schedule a review soon! :)) |
wegank
added
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Jan 4, 2025
Since psqlodbc is an official upstream project, we should take ownership of it.
The latest version is not available from odbc/versions.old/.., thus move to fetchFromGitHub. No changelog found anywhere.
Resolves NixOS#61580
wolfgangwalther
force-pushed
the
postgresql-libpq
branch
from
January 11, 2025 10:57
7ab2b37
to
bc79bc4
Compare
wolfgangwalther
removed
the
2.status: merge conflict
This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch
label
Jan 11, 2025
1 task
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
6.topic: continuous integration
Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions
6.topic: games
6.topic: lua
6.topic: ocaml
6.topic: php
6.topic: python
6.topic: qt/kde
6.topic: ruby
6.topic: rust
8.has: package (new)
This PR adds a new package
10.rebuild-darwin: 1001-2500
10.rebuild-linux: 2501-5000
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This creates a separate libpq package as discussed in #61580 (comment).
This brings down the number of rebuilds after updating
postgresql
to about 1.2k darwin and 2.5k linux. Before, they were ~ around 5k, IIRC.Unfortunately, we are still not anywhere low enough to be able to merge
postgresql
updates directly into master. I think the nr. 1 reason for that ispostgresqlTestHook
- and the fact that many packages use a very simple postgresql server in their build dependencies for the check phase.The only way to get the number of rebuilds lower would be to package
postgresqlTestHook
as a separate postgresql derivation. The idea would be, that security related issues are irrelevant for the check phase of other packages - and thus updating this separately could easily go through staging with a certain delay. This derivation could also be one that is built with the minimal feature set, making it slimmer overall.I still think that introducing
libpq
is a good thing on it's own, thus this PR.Closes #61580 and #191920
Things done
nix.conf
? (See Nix manual)sandbox = relaxed
sandbox = true
nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD"
. Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage./result/bin/
)Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.