| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Michael Banck <michael(dot)banck(at)credativ(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_verify_checksums and -fno-strict-aliasing |
| Date: | 2018-08-30 20:02:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20180830200258.GG15446@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 09:35:33PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Should we make it a separate test in pg_verify_checksums, or should we
> piggyback on the pg_basebackup tests (which AFAICT is the only ones that
> create a cluster with checksums enabled at all, and thus is the only
> codepath that actually uses the backend checksum code at all, which I think
> is an even worse thing to have no tests of)
This should be a separate suite. And FWIW, we only use pg_regress to
make sure that an already-initialized data folder has the correct,
secure authentication set. So creating a node with checksums enabled is
just that:
$node->init(extra => ['--data-checksums']);
[... 20 minutes later ...]
Attached is a basic test suite ;)
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| verify-checksums-tap.patch | text/x-diff | 2.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2018-08-30 20:07:38 | Re: pg_verify_checksums and -fno-strict-aliasing |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2018-08-30 20:02:13 | Re: pg_verify_checksums and -fno-strict-aliasing |