Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests
Date: 2017-01-23 13:28:37
Message-ID: 24cf2b76-9b9f-bba9-7e8b-89b9d0ba2471@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 01/20/2017 01:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm surprised nobody reported this problem earlier.
> It looks like at least part of the answer is that the buildfarm isn't
> running this test. AFAICS, it runs "make installcheck" not
> "make check" in src/test/modules. I don't know whether any of the
> critters would have duplicated the failure, but they weren't trying.
>
> I don't know if any of the other src/test/modules/ subdirectories
> test more in make check mode than make installcheck mode, but if
> they do, we probably oughta change the buildfarm script.
>
>

Is there a reason why these tests aren't run under installcheck? If
there is a justification I can look at it, or we should decide on one
canonical mode of running the tests and stick to that.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2017-01-23 13:38:24 Re: Checksums by default?
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2017-01-23 13:27:39 Re: Checksums by default?