Re: Update Windows CI Task Names: Server 2022 + VS 2022 Upgrade

From: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Update Windows CI Task Names: Server 2022 + VS 2022 Upgrade
Date: 2025-09-30 15:23:25
Message-ID: CAN55FZ2d4Qa=ZXpuDxnoUn28G+Z0e06LwWS1qpZ-UNRAsWY2VQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 15:30, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-09-15 11:50:07 +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 17:55, Jacob Champion
> > <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 7:18 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
> > > > I don't think we need this level of complication. We already have the
> > > > situation that for example "linux" covers several tasks
> > >
> > > Recently, I've wished that it were otherwise; if I'm debugging a
> > > Meson-only test failure in Linux, I don't want to burn credits running
> > > Autoconf.
> >
> > I agree with Jacob. I think it would be better if each task had its
> > own tag. I left it as "vs2019" for now.
>
> I don't really agree that this is something that needs to be changed as part
> of this.

Definitely.

> Or that the CI_OS_ONLY is really the way to tackle this.
>
> Perhaps we should just have CI_TASK_ONLY and CI_OS_ONLY?

I think this is a good idea. How about something like the attached? It
allows you to expand to the CI_*_ONLY option.

--
Regards,
Nazir Bilal Yavuz
Microsoft

Attachment Content-Type Size
ci-Add-CI_TASK_ONLY.patch text/x-patch 4.8 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aleksander Alekseev 2025-09-30 15:25:14 Re: Sending unflushed WAL in physical replication
Previous Message Stefanie Janine Stölting 2025-09-30 15:20:40 Re: Problem with DEB packages