Re: separate serial_schedule useful?

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I noticed that the test "hash_func" was listed in parallel_schedule but
> not in serial_schedule. I have seen that a few times recently where a
> patch proposes to add a new test file but forgets to add it to the
> serial_schedule.

Yeah, this is way too routine :-(

> I wonder whether it's still useful to keep two separate test lists. I
> think we could just replace make installcheck with what make
> installcheck-parallel MAX_CONNECTIONS=1 does. Thoughts?

Hm, that seems like potentially a good idea. I can't see an argument
against it offhand.

The other routine mistake, which I see Robert just made again,
is to break the at-most-twenty-parallel-tests-at-once convention.
I wonder if we can get in some sort of automated check for that.

regards, tom lane