Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take two
Date: 2018-03-06 20:13:46
Message-ID: 08724398-ce66-9236-18fc-b7f22a15c017@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3/4/18 16:09, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> AFAICT, this still has the same problem as the previous take, namely
>>> that adding a TAP test suite to the pg_upgrade subdirectory will end up
>>> with the build farm client running the pg_upgrade tests twice. What we
>>> likely need here is an update to the build farm client in conjunction
>>> with this.

> Pushed with a bug fix. See
> <https://github.com/PGBuildFarm/client-code/commit/826d450eff05d15c8bb3c5b2728da5328634a588>
>
> If you want to do this soon I can put out a Buildfarm Client release
> fairly quickly.

I think the dependency is mostly the other way around. How quickly
would build farm owners install the upgrade?

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2018-03-06 20:15:41 Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise aggregation/grouping
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-03-06 20:11:08 Re: [HACKERS] Support for Secure Transport SSL library on macOS as OpenSSL alternative