Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment
Date: 2010-08-11 15:55:52
Message-ID: 6843.1281542152@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> Why not just compare pg_backend_pid() with postmaster.pid?

> See the prior discussion in the archives. We started with that and
> found problems, to which Tom suggested a random number as the best
> solution.

I think Peter's idea is a bit different though. The previous concern
was about what information would be okay to expose in a pg_ping response
packet, which presumably would be available to anybody who could open a
connection to the postmaster port. What he's suggesting is to
crosscheck against data that is available after a successful login.
That eliminates the security complaint.

It strikes me we could do something without adding a postmaster-PID
SQL function, too. What about doing SHOW DATA_DIRECTORY and comparing
that to what pg_regress expects?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2010-08-11 16:23:49 Re: string_to_array with an empty input string
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-08-11 15:53:37 Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment