Re: Making background psql nicer to use in tap tests

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Making background psql nicer to use in tap tests
Date: 2023-04-07 16:14:37
Message-ID: B8EDCEA6-830B-4EDB-80D8-A19570699F7E@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 7 Apr 2023, at 17:04, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> Afaict the failures are purely about patch 2, not 1, right?

Correct. The attached v6 wraps the interactive_psql test in a SKIP block with
a conditional on IO::Pty being available.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

Attachment Content-Type Size
v6-0002-Test-SCRAM-iteration-changes-with-psql-password.patch application/octet-stream 2.2 KB
v6-0001-Refactor-background-psql-TAP-functions.patch application/octet-stream 30.4 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2023-04-07 16:17:38 Re: Track IO times in pg_stat_io
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2023-04-07 16:01:15 Re: [PATCH] Introduce array_shuffle() and array_sample()