Re: Ensure that STDERR is empty during connect_ok

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Ensure that STDERR is empty during connect_ok
Date: 2022-02-02 15:48:22
Message-ID: 202202021548.45vahquv2k26@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2022-Feb-02, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

> Making this a subtest in order to not having to change the callers, turns the
> patch into the attached. For this we must group the new test with one already
> existing test, if we group more into it (which would make more sense) then we
> need to change callers as that reduce the testcount across the tree.

Well, it wasn't my intention that this patch would not have to change
the callers. What I was thinking about is making connect_ok() have a
subtest for *all* the tests it contains (and changing the callers to
match), so that *in the future* we can add more tests there without
having to change the callers *again*.

> Or did I misunderstand you?

I think you did.

--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Cómo ponemos nuestros dedos en la arcilla del otro. Eso es la amistad; jugar
al alfarero y ver qué formas se pueden sacar del otro" (C. Halloway en
La Feria de las Tinieblas, R. Bradbury)

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2022-02-02 15:55:53 Re: refactoring basebackup.c
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2022-02-02 15:44:03 Re: pg_receivewal - couple of improvements