Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 20:51:13
Message-ID: 4C630D41.6090105@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08/11/2010 04:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Another way would be to have pg_regress honour an environment var like
>> PG_REGRESS_PORT, which the buildfarm script could use.
> Yeah, that would work too. (Is it portable to Windows, though?)

Should be

> I prefer the change-the-default approach mainly because it wouldn't
> require any documentation, whereas it'd be a bit hard to argue that
> environment variables etc shouldn't be documented ...
>
>

Yeah. The other advantage is that we would not need to wait until we had
got everyone to update their versions of the buildfarm code. So I agree
this is the nicest solution.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-08-11 20:52:42 Re: string_to_array with an empty input string
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-11 20:47:46 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment