From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: mb and ecpg regression tests |
Date: | 2007-05-17 17:14:48 |
Message-ID: | 3142.1179422088@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> I don't think ECPG can use pg_regress as is, because it does more than
> just run psql. We probably need to look at factoring out the common bits
> into a shared lib. That's not a bad idea anyway.
A shared library is probably overkill (it has a lot more installation
overhead than it's worth), but at least factor the source
code so we don't have two copies of the common bits.
It wouldn't be a bad goal to try to use the same "pg_regress 2.0" for
both uses, either. I'm tempted to suggest it should become a separate
subdirectory under src/bin/ to remind people it's decoupled from the
regression tests per se...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-05-17 17:17:07 | Re: Updated bitmap index patch |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-05-17 17:03:54 | Re: mb and ecpg regression tests |