Re: some pg_dump query code simplification

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: some pg_dump query code simplification
Date: 2018-08-28 22:05:57
Message-ID: 8085.1535493957@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> I wonder- what if we had an option to pg_dump to explicitly tell it what
> the server's version is and then have TAP tests to run with different
> versions?

Uh ... telling it what the version is doesn't make that true, so I'd
have no confidence in a test^H^H^H^Hkluge done that way. The way
to test is to point it at an *actual* back-branch server.

Andrew has a buildfarm module that does precisely that, although
I'm not sure what its test dataset is --- probably the regression
database from each branch. I also have a habit of doing such testing
manually whenever I touch version-sensitive parts of pg_dump.

Dunno about the idea of running the pg_dump TAP tests against back
branches. I find that code sufficiently unreadable that maintaining
several more copies of it doesn't sound like fun at all.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2018-08-28 22:10:29 Re: some pg_dump query code simplification
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2018-08-28 22:01:58 Re: Some pgq table rewrite incompatibility with logical decoding?