| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> | 
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Regression tests versus the buildfarm environment | 
| Date: | 2010-08-12 14:22:43 | 
| Message-ID: | 13573.1281622963@sss.pgh.pa.us | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On ons, 2010-08-11 at 16:17 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We should have the buildfarm configuration such that any one run uses
>> the same port number for both installed and uninstalled regression
>> tests.
> I'm getting lost here what the actual requirements are.  The above is
> obviously not going to work as a default for pg_regress, because the
> port number for an installed test is determined by the user and is
> likely to be in the public range, whereas the uninstalled test should
> use something from the private range.
Certainly, but the buildfarm's "installed" test doesn't try to start on
5432.  It starts on whatever branch_port the buildfarm owner has
specified for that animal and that branch.  It's the owner's
responsibility to make that nonconflicting across the services and
buildfarm critters he has running on a given machine.  What I'm saying
is that *in the buildfarm* we want the "make check" case to also use
this predetermined safe port number.  That has nothing whatever to do
with what is good practice for other cases.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-08-12 14:31:43 | Re: MERGE command for inheritance | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-12 14:15:57 | Re: Libpq: PQftype, PQfsize |