Re: TAP tests - installcheck vs check

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TAP tests - installcheck vs check
Date: 2017-04-24 00:45:12
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQc8_KntsYHTV7Dq=V+JEteLP12UdPWtK_=FwH-cf+dBQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Andrew Dunstan
<andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
> AFAICT, unlike the pg_regress checks, which in the installcheck case run
> against a running instance of postgres, for TAP tests the only
> difference is that that for the check case a temp install is done,
> possibly with some extra contrib modules. Is that correct? If is is, why
> aren't we providing an installcheck target for tests like recover. In at
> least one case (buildfarmn jacana) installs are quite expensive (2 or 3
> minutes) and if they are pointless as seems to be the case here why
> can't we just avoid them?

install.pl deploys by default the dll of modules needed for the tests,
so no objections. Don't you think the TAP scripts in src/test/perl
should be installed as well? I think that this would make sense for
consistency with what other Nix platforms do, but there is no real
installation of PGXS there. So perhaps they could be deployed in a
different path like scripts/perl?
--
Michael
VMware vCenter Server
www.vmware.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vitaly Burovoy 2017-04-24 01:03:31 Re: identity columns
Previous Message Andres Freund 2017-04-24 00:04:52 Re: walsender & parallelism