From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Testing the async-commit patch |
Date: | 2007-08-13 19:15:21 |
Message-ID: | 19466.1187032521@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> I have some ideas about testing configuration items. Doing all our tests
> with the default config is not ideal, I think. Essentially we'd put up a
> server that would have sets of <branch, list-of-config-lines>. The
> client would connect to the server if it could and get the set(s) of
> lines for the branch on question, and for each set it would try another
> run of installcheck (I'm also wondering if we should switch to doing
> installcheck-parallel). Anyway, this would be a config option on the
> buildfarm, so we wouldn't overburden hosts with limited run windows
> (e.g. the Solaris boxes Sun has on the farm) or slow run times (e.g.
> some of the old and/or tiny hardware we have).
> If this seems worth it I'll put it on my TODO.
Sounds like a good plan, except that an extra server seems unnecessary
mechanism (and perhaps an unnecessary security risk). We can just put
a file into CVS src/test/regress showing what we'd like tested.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-08-13 19:17:17 | Re: Testing the async-commit patch |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-08-13 18:36:12 | Re: Testing the async-commit patch |