Re: TAP test module - PostgresClient

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, nospam-abuse(at)bloodgate(dot)com, craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: TAP test module - PostgresClient
Date: 2018-03-02 04:39:42
Message-ID: 20180302043942.GF2259@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 02:27:13AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> If I understand correctly there's been no progress on this since, and
> there'd definitely need to be major work to get something we can agree
> upon. Doesn't seem v11 material. I think we should mark this as returned
> with feedback. Arguments against?

Agreed with your position. The TAP tests rely on IPC::Run as a pillar
of its infrastructure. I think that if we need a base API to do such
capabilities we ought to prioritize what we can do with it first instead
of trying to reinvent the wheel as this patch proposes in such a
complicated way.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2018-03-02 04:50:31 Re: Add default role 'pg_access_server_files'
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-03-02 04:34:35 Re: [HACKERS] taking stdbool.h into use