Re: A little enhancement for hashdisk testset

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: "Hou, Zhijie" <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A little enhancement for hashdisk testset
Date: 2020-09-24 07:39:34
Message-ID: EBF6B21C-3883-4410-B20D-0420C7F1E920@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 24 Sep 2020, at 07:45, Hou, Zhijie <houzj(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:

> I found some tables is not dropped at the end of the sqlscript,
> It does not hava any problem, but I think it's better to drop the table in time.

There is value in keeping a representative set of objects around after
regression tests, as the database which is left after regression tests run is
used as the input to the pg_regress tests. That being said, I don't think that
was the intention for these relationns in commit 92c58fd94801, but in general
we should avoid cleaning up too much to ensure that we stress pg_upgrade well
enough (there is a delicate balance to keep test runtime short as well of
course).

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-09-24 08:11:03 Re: 回复:how to create index concurrently on partitioned table
Previous Message Katsuragi Yuta 2020-09-24 07:32:51 Re: [PATCH] Add features to pg_stat_statements