Re: Teach pg_upgrade test to honor NO_TEMP_INSTALL

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 5/20/19 9:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> I'm confused as to why this was done as a purely optional path, rather
>> than just ripping out the pg_upgrade specific install?

> By specifying NO_TEMP_INSTALL you are in effect certifying that there is
> already a suitable temp install available. But that might well not be
> the case. In fact, there have been several iterations of code to get the
> buildfarm client to check reasonable reliably that there is such an
> install before it chooses to use the flag.

Right. Issuing "make check" in src/bin/pg_upgrade certainly shouldn't
skip making a new install. But if we're recursing down from a top-level
check-world, we ought to be able to use the install it made.

regards, tom lane