Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 13:43:55
Message-ID: 4C6262CB02000025000344A9@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> A look at the code shows that it is merely trying to run psql, and
> if psql reports that it can connect to the specified port, then
> pg_regress thinks the postmaster started OK. Of course, psql was
> really reporting that it could connect to the other instance's
> postmaster.

Clearly picking unique ports for `make check` is the ultimate
solution, but I'm curious whether this would have been caught sooner
with less effort if the pg_ctl TODO titled "Have the postmaster
write a random number to a file on startup that pg_ctl checks
against the contents of a pg_ping response on its initial connection
(without login)" had been implemented.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2009-10/msg00110.php

It sounds like it's related; but was curious to confirm.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2010-08-11 13:46:04 Re: RecordTransactionCommit() and SharedInvalidationMessages
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-11 13:43:18 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment