Re: PATCH pass PGOPTIONS to pg_regress

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Ildar Musin <i(dot)musin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PATCH pass PGOPTIONS to pg_regress
Date: 2018-05-30 15:22:47
Message-ID: 20180530152247.GA17578@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:28:27PM +0300, Ildar Musin wrote:
> Here extra.conf is implied to be a file in extension's root directory which
> contains additional server options.
> This would only work for `make check` though, not `make installcheck`.

REGRESS_OPTS is more widely known for this purpose, and I use it as
well. Still, I agree that there is no need to add an extra mechanism
with PGOPTIONS if a feature already exists. One thing which is also
not much known is that multiple --temp-config entries can be defined
where the last entry wins if the same parameter maps across multiple
files, so you can reduce configuration delta chunks if you need to worry
about multiple versions of the backend for the same development branch

I tend to prefer using one branch per stable version to map with
Postgres and it makes code chunks easier to see without thinking about
PG_VERSION_NUM, still that depends on the project developped.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Teodor Sigaev 2018-05-30 15:39:29 Re: Few comments on commit 857f9c36 (skip full index scans )
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2018-05-30 14:37:27 Re: Microoptimization of Bitmapset usage in postgres_fdw