| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Reporting script runtimes in pg_regress |
| Date: | 2019-02-18 12:59:51 |
| Message-ID: | c839aacf-d480-b4e6-7212-f0c66ff05927@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-02-15 15:54, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We should also strive to align "FAILED" properly.
> Hmm. The reasonable ways to accomplish that look to be either
> (a) pad "ok" to the width of "FAILED", or (b) rely on emitting a tab.
> I don't much like either, especially from the localization angle.
> One should also note that FAILED often comes along with additional
> verbiage, such as "(ignored)" or a note about process exit status;
> so I think making such cases line up totally neatly is a lost cause
> anyway.
Yeah, not strictly required, but someone might want to play around with
it a bit.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Banck | 2019-02-18 13:22:42 | Re: Progress reporting for pg_verify_checksums |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-02-18 12:56:52 | Use varargs macro for CACHEDEBUG |