On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:09 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 3:32 AM, Christian Kruse
> <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> For the documentation patch, I propose the attached to avoid future
>>> confusions. Comments? It might make sense to back-patch as well.
>>
>> Compiles, didn't find any typos and I think it is comprehensible.
>
> I took a look at this with a view to committing it but on examination
> I'm not sure this is the best way to proceed. The proposed text
> documents that the tests should be run in a database called
> regression, but the larger documentation chapter of which this section
> is a part never explains how to run them anywhere else, so it feels a
> bit like telling a ten-year-old not to burn out the clutch.
>
> The bit about not changing enable_* probably belongs, if anywhere, in
> section 30.2, on test evaluation, rather than here.
And what about the attached? I have moved all the content to 30.2, and
added two paragraphs: one about the planner flags, the other about the
database used.
Regards,
--
Michael