From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment |
Date: | 2010-08-11 15:42:04 |
Message-ID: | 1281541324.26522.1.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On ons, 2010-08-11 at 10:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > One of us is missing something. I didn't say to run the checks using
> the
> > configured port. I had in mind something like:
>
> > port = 0xC000 | ((PG_VERSION_NUM + DEF_PGPORT) & 0x3FFF);
>
> Oh, I see, modify the DEF_PGPORT don't just use it as-is. OK, except
> that I think something like the above is still pretty risky for the
> buildfarm, because you would still have conflicts for assorted
> combinations of version numbers and branch_port settings.
>
> How about just this:
>
> port = 0xC000 | (DEF_PGPORT & 0x3FFF);
The version number was put in there intentionally, for developers who
work on multiple branches at once. That's the whole reason this code
exists. Please don't remove it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-08-11 15:42:40 | Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-11 15:38:07 | Re: MERGE command for inheritance |