Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

feat: update rust to 1.84.0 and related needed changes #1590

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 9, 2025

Conversation

samrose
Copy link
Collaborator

@samrose samrose commented May 9, 2025

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

needed to run nix flake update rust-overlay to bring on the code that would make rust 1.84.0 available to the nix build (this command updated just that rust-overlay input for the flake.lock file.)

Then, due to port conflicts on extension that rely on rust for pgrx builds, updating the input triggered a rebuild of other pg extensions (although did not change their dependencies, but it will always rebuild if inputs change version in any way). This created port conflicts for the internal tests the extensions run. So I applied a port handling to pg_graphql as well to fix that issue.

@samrose samrose requested review from a team as code owners May 9, 2025 12:17
@samrose samrose merged commit 6cfc9b9 into bo/chore/wrappers-0.5.0 May 9, 2025
14 checks passed
@samrose samrose deleted the sam/rust-1-8-4 branch May 9, 2025 16:39
Comment on lines +30 to +32
PGPORT = toString (5430 +
(if builtins.match ".*_.*" postgresql.version != null then 1 else 0) + # +1 for OrioleDB
((builtins.fromJSON (builtins.substring 0 2 postgresql.version)) - 15) * 2); # +2 for each major version
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hm, this is confusing. Why does pg_graphql needs to know anything about the PGPORT?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@steve-chavez its part of the pgrx build process and so needs to be handled first every pgrx extension at build time

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants