Re: Increase pltcl test coverage

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Karl Lehenbauer <karl(at)flightaware(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Increase pltcl test coverage
Date: 2017-01-09 15:17:20
Message-ID: 10921.1483975040@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> writes:
> On 1/8/17 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But I don't understand
>> how you got the sample output shown in the patch. Is this based
>> on some unsubmitted changes in pltcl's error handling?

> Maybe it's a version difference?
> echo 'puts [info patchlevel];exit 0' | tclsh
> 8.6.6

Mmm, yeah, I'm on 8.5.13. Evidently what we're looking at here is a
change in what Tcl puts into $::errorCode for this error. That being
the case, we can't use $::errorCode for the regression test output, or
it'll fail depending on Tcl version. I changed it to just return "$err",
ie the basic error message. It might turn out that that's
version-dependent too, but the buildfarm should tell us.

Pushed with that and some other, mostly-cosmetic changes.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vladimir Rusinov 2017-01-09 15:50:37 Re: [PATCH] Rename pg_switch_xlog to pg_switch_wal
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2017-01-09 15:05:10 Re: Make pg_basebackup -x stream the default