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 18:12:27 |
Message-ID: | 1281550347.26522.13.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On ons, 2010-08-11 at 11:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > On ons, 2010-08-11 at 10:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> 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.
>
> I work on multiple branches all day every day. This wouldn't hinder
> me in the slightest, because I use a different DEF_PGPORT for each
> branch. If you don't, it's hard to see how you manage to deal with
> multiple branches on one machine ... do you not ever actually install
> them?
No, not nearly as much as I run "make check".
> Even if you don't, changing this would only mean that you
> couldn't safely run "make check" concurrently in multiple branches.
That's exactly the point. The original discussion is here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/491D9935.9010200@gmx.net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Oliveira | 2010-08-11 18:19:35 | 16/32/48/64 bytes integers |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-08-11 18:09:17 | Re: MERGE command for inheritance |