Re: TAP tests - installcheck vs check

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TAP tests - installcheck vs check
Date: 2017-04-25 15:29:44
Message-ID: f4ee2bce-3582-06ca-9e77-c67bb1b66fea@2ndQuadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 04/25/2017 11:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> I'm in the process of moving all the buildfarm tests to use check
>> instead of installcheck, but in such a way that it doesn't constantly
>> generate redundant installs.
> But is that something only of interest to the buildfarm, or should we
> do something in the Makefile infrastructure to make it more generally
> available?

It already is. If you have a temp_install with all the required pieces
do "make NO_TEMP_INSTALL=1 check"

The logic I am adding to the buildfarm is essentially to install contrib
and test_modules in the temp install directory as part of their install
steps and to check that that's been done before using NO_TEMP_INSTALL.

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 Stephen Frost 2017-04-25 15:42:47 Re: pg_dump emits ALTER TABLE ONLY partitioned_table
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-04-25 15:28:48 Re: StandbyRecoverPreparedTransactions recovers subtrans links incorrectly