Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set
Date: 2018-03-18 23:30:33
Message-ID: 15980.1521415833@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On March 18, 2018 4:06:18 PM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Hm ... pg_regress unsets PGDATABASE, along with the other related
>> environment variables, when it has a temp installation but not
>> when it doesn't. So what I don't understand is why your environment
>> doesn't also break every other regression test besides ecpg.

> All the others specify a database. The issue with the ecpg test is that
> it doesn't for two test cases.

Ah. Well, it doesn't seem unreasonable to want to test that case,
so I don't think "remove the test case" is the right answer.

Is it sane for pg_regress to unset PGDATABASE unconditionally? Not
sure, but if we're generally always specifying a value, maybe that's
OK.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-03-18 23:41:15 Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2018-03-18 23:28:05 Re: [HACKERS] AdvanceXLInsertBuffer vs. WAL segment compressibility