On 09/02/2011 07:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 09/02/2011 06:37 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> It won't work, unless you have a solution for fixing the paths of the
>>> shared library modules used by the regression tests.
>> Well, we could drop those functions and not run tests that require them.
>> Or we could possibly install the libraries in $libdir and hack pg_proc
>> accordingly. We'd have to install them on both the source and
>> destination branches, of course.
> The only one that's problematic is pg_regress.so; contrib modules are
> already installed in $libdir. I still think that installing
> pg_regress.so in $libdir may be the most reasonable solution, assuming
> that the delta involved isn't too great. Yeah, we would have to
> back-patch the changes into every release branch we want to test
> upgrading from, but how risky is that really? The *only* thing it
> affects is the regression tests.
Agreed. It doesn't seem terribly dangerous.
There are three listed in the regression db I just looked at:
regress.so, autoinc.so and refint.so.
> Maybe I should produce a draft patch for moving pg_regress.so that way,
> and we could see how big a delta it really is.
Sounds like a plan.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Jeremy Drake||Date: 2011-09-03 05:54:33|
|Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove "fmgr.h" include in cube contrib ---
caused crash on a Ge |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-09-02 23:49:12|
|Subject: Re: pg_upgrade automatic testing |