From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: regression test for extended query protocol |
Date: | 2016-08-05 07:33:11 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqRD5Dkm3RWjLEwiRPffN7eNcz3295wHC44ZSmKV_p8J3A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> If somebody had some spare time to devote to this, I would suggest to
> implement something in core that can be used to specify a list of
> commands to run, and a list of files-to-be-saved-in-bf-log emitted by
> each command. We could have one such base file in the core repo that
> specifies some tests to run (such as "make -C src/test/recovery check"),
> and an additional file can be given by buildfarm animals to run custom
> tests, without having to write BF modules for each thing. With that,
> pgsql committers could simply add a new test to be run by all buildfarm
> animals by adding it to the list in core.
Do you think about using a special makefile target to run those
commands, say in src/test? At the end we are going to need to patch
the buildfarm client code at least once, at least that would be worth
it in the long term..
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Anastasia Lubennikova | 2016-08-05 07:54:00 | Refactoring of heapam code. |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-08-05 06:07:43 | Re: Detecting skipped data from logical slots (data silently skipped) |