Re: pg_upgrade automatic testing

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade automatic testing
Date: 2011-05-25 23:29:55
Message-ID: BANLkTinARksWwRF4tG5ex-+UaYCvep7x7g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On ons, 2011-04-27 at 18:14 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
>> Enthusiastic +1 for this concept.  There's at least one rough edge: it fails if
>> you have another postmaster running on port 5432.
>
> This has now been addressed: pg_upgrade accepts PGPORT settings.
> Attached is a slightly updated patch runs the test suite with a port of
> 65432, which you can override by setting PGPORT yourself.
>
> Anyway, is this something that people want in the repository?  It's not
> as polished as the pg_regress business, but it is definitely helpful.

Is this going to result in using the built binaries with the installed
libraries, a la Tom's recent complaint about the isolation tests?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2011-05-26 00:12:52 Re: tackling full page writes
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-05-25 23:11:31 Re: [ADMIN] pg_class reltuples/relpages not updated by autovacuum/vacuum