| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_regress: Treat child process failure as test failure |
| Date: | 2023-02-22 20:55:44 |
| Message-ID: | 284821.1677099344@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
>> On 22 Feb 2023, at 21:33, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-22 15:10:11 +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>> Rebased patch to handle breakage of v2 due to bd8d453e9b.
>> I think we probably should just apply this? The current behaviour doesn't seem
>> right, and I don't see a downside of the new behaviour?
> Agreed, I can't think of a regression test where we wouldn't want this. My
> only concern was if any of the ECPG tests were doing something odd that would
> break from this but I can't see anything.
+1. I was a bit surprised to realize that we might not count such
a case as a failure.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2023-02-22 21:09:25 | Re: [PATCH] Fix unbounded authentication exchanges during PQconnectPoll() |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2023-02-22 20:50:41 | Re: Wrong query results caused by loss of join quals |