Re: Drongo vs. 9.4 initdb TAP test

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Drongo vs. 9.4 initdb TAP test
Date: 2019-12-23 00:57:34
Message-ID: 13391.1577062654@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 07:24:09PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This test is passing in the newer branches --- evidently due to
>> the 9.5-era commit 1a629c1b1, which removed this TAP script's
>> dependency on "rm -rf". So we should either back-patch that
>> commit into 9.4 or undo whatever configuration change caused
>> drongo to try to run more tests. I favor the former.

> I would prefer simply removing the dependency of rm -rf in the tests,
> even if that's for a short time as 9.4 is EOL in two months.

I'd vote for back-patching 1a629c1b1 as-is, or is that what you meant?

> A back-patch applies without conflicts, and the tests are able to pass.
> Would you prefer doing it yourself? I have not checked yet on
> Windows, better to make sure that it does not fail.

I don't have the ability to test it on Windows --- if you want to do that,
feel free to do so and push.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yugo Nagata 2019-12-23 01:07:16 Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-12-23 00:54:30 Re: smgr vs DropRelFileNodeBuffers() vs filesystem state vs no critical section