Skip to content
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
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: staging
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

wolfgangwalther
Copy link
Contributor

@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther commented Nov 27, 2024

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 is postgresqlTestHook - 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

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux (the directly changed packages)
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

@ofborg ofborg bot added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Nov 28, 2024
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther force-pushed the postgresql-libpq branch 2 times, most recently from 1eb5366 to 862bd30 Compare November 28, 2024 18:48
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Nov 28, 2024
@ofborg 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 wegank added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Dec 31, 2024
@wolfgangwalther
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased to resolve merge conflicts.

@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jan 1, 2025
@wegank wegank removed the 12.approvals: 2 This PR was reviewed and approved by two reputable people label Jan 1, 2025
@Ma27
Copy link
Member

Ma27 commented Jan 1, 2025

I promise, I haven't forgotten about that, I'll do my best to schedule a review soon! :))

@wegank wegank added the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jan 4, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther removed the 2.status: merge conflict This PR has merge conflicts with the target branch label Jan 11, 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.
@Ma27
Copy link
Member

Ma27 commented Jan 18, 2025

FYI pushed a fix for pdo_pgsql/pgsql exts in PHP.

@wolfgangwalther
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI pushed a fix for pdo_pgsql/pgsql exts in PHP.

Seems like that needs some nixfmt, I don't get why, though.

I don't know why, but after the switch to libpq, the builds failed with
an error like

    configure: error: Unable to build the PDO PostgreSQL driver: at least libpq 9.1 is required

and adding `libpq` to build inputs solves the issue.
@Ma27 Ma27 force-pushed the postgresql-libpq branch from f54d73e to 448a13d Compare January 18, 2025 22:06
@Ma27
Copy link
Member

Ma27 commented Jan 18, 2025

Fixed.

Copy link
Member

@Ma27 Ma27 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The change itself looks good to me.

After re-reading #294504 (comment) I'm not sure if I consider the status quo that bad: packages like psycopg or pdo_pgsql only depend on the lib output at runtime which is effectively libpq already. The static build seems to produce static libraries successfully as well nowadays. Regarding dependency concerns, one may still work with outputChecks.

OTOH with another postgresql package that's then used for the test hook we could allow shipping all server updates to master directly. But then again, we could also ship security updates to staging-next directly to speed things up a bit.

I'm not sure.
I'm slightly leaning towards this solution, but figured it'd make sense to share my thoughts from review before merging (hoping that we didn't discuss this before and I just didn't find the thread again), not after.

@szlend szlend closed this Jan 18, 2025
@szlend szlend reopened this Jan 18, 2025
@szlend
Copy link
Member

szlend commented Jan 18, 2025

Apologies, misclicked 😅

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants