Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Failure in commit_ts tap tests
Date: 2017-01-27 08:35:37
Message-ID: c1f414f8-9f86-5387-6c8a-91239573f105@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 01/26/2017 03:50 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
>>> On 01/24/2017 05:17 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>>> Maybe we can drop that line and put it back once we get COMMENT ON
>>>> CURRENT_DATABASE.
>>> Works for me.
>> If that's enough to get the "make check" cases passing in the buildfarm,
>> then +1.
> Okay, done.
>
> It is really quite annoying that the buildfarm doesn't do what stock
> tests do. What about pushing a bit stronger for having these
> optimizations as part of the standard build run, instead of being only
> in the buildfarm client script?
>

There is nothing that the buildfarm does that's not a stock test. What
it does is run the stock tests with USE_MODULE_DB=1 (which you can do
too). That is something provided for in our Make files. The reason is
that otherwise we constantly overwrite the regression database. That can
make it a lot harder to go back after a buildfarm run and find errors.

That's why you should not assume the name of the database when you're
writing a test.

cheers

andrew
--

Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Beena Emerson 2017-01-27 08:47:51 Re: increasing the default WAL segment size
Previous Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2017-01-27 08:33:57 Re: Radix tree for character conversion