From: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Clean up role created in new subscription test. |
Date: | 2023-03-30 19:19:17 |
Message-ID: | 99112997-6732-42C7-989B-06406C911FE2@yesql.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
> On 30 Mar 2023, at 20:44, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Maybe it'd be close enough to expect there to be no roles named
> "regress_xxx". In combination with
> -DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS, that would prevent us
> from accidentally leaving stuff behind, and we could hope that it doesn't
> cause false failures in real installations.
Would that check be always on or only when pg_regress is compiled with
-DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS?
> Another idea could be for pg_regress to enforce that "select count(*)
> from pg_roles" gives the same answer before and after the test run.
That wouldn't prevent the contents of pg_roles to have changed though, so there
is a (slim) false positive risk with that no?
--
Daniel Gustafsson
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2023-03-30 19:27:14 | pgsql: Show record information in pg_get_wal_block_info. |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-03-30 19:08:33 | pgsql: Simplify transformJsonAggConstructor() API |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2023-03-30 19:23:15 | Re: Parallel Full Hash Join |
Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2023-03-30 19:17:07 | Re: ResourceOwner refactoring |