Re: pgbench tests vs Windows

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pgbench tests vs Windows
Date: 2019-07-24 07:56:29
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.21.1907240729300.10384@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello Andrew,

> Unfortunately, this isn't portable, as I've just discovered at the cost
> of quite a bit of time. In particular, you can't assume expr is present
> and in the path on Windows. The Windows equivalent would be something like:
> \setshell two\
>   @set /a c = 1 + :one  && echo %c%

Hmmm... Can we assume that echo is really always there on Windows? If so,
the attached patch does something only with "echo".

> I propose to prepare a patch along these lines. Alternatively we could
> just drop it - I don't think the test matters all that hugely.

The point is to have some minimal coverage so that unexpected changes are
caught. This is the only call to a working \setshell.


Attachment Content-Type Size
pgbench-setshell-test-1.path text/plain 762 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2019-07-24 08:23:44 Re: pgbench - allow to create partitioned tables
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-07-24 07:50:53 Re: On the stability of TAP tests for LDAP