From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Test 041_checkpoint_at_promote.pl faild in installcheck due to missing injection_points |
Date: | 2024-08-20 16:10:08 |
Message-ID: | 1555486.1724170208@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Ugh. The basic issue here is that "make install-world" doesn't
> install anything from underneath src/test/modules, which I recall
> as being an intentional decision. Rather than poking a hole in
> that policy for injection_points, I wonder if we should move it
> to contrib.
... which would also imply writing documentation and so forth,
and it'd mean that injection_points starts to show up in end-user
installations. (That would happen with the alternative choice of
hacking install-world to include src/test/modules/injection_points,
too.) While you could argue that that'd be helpful for extension
authors who'd like to use injection_points in their own tests, I'm
not sure that it's where we want to go with that module. It's only
meant as test scaffolding, and I don't think we've analyzed the
implications of some naive user installing it.
We do, however, need to preserve the property that installcheck
works after install-world. I'm starting to think that maybe
the 041 test should be hacked to silently skip if it doesn't
find injection_points available. (We could then remove some of
the makefile hackery that's supporting the current behavior.)
Probably the same needs to happen in each other test script
that's using injection_points --- I imagine that Maxim's
test is simply failing here first.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bertrand Drouvot | 2024-08-20 16:23:06 | Re: define PG_REPLSLOT_DIR |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-08-20 16:02:34 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |