| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
| Subject: | Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto |
| Date: | 2007-02-10 09:36:56 |
| Message-ID: | 200702101036.58691.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> > On Feb 6, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> ... massive expansion of the tests doesn't seem justified
> >
> > What about the idea that's been floated in the past about a --
> > extensive mode for regression testing that would (generally) only
> > be used by the build farm. That would mean others wouldn't have to
> > suffer through extremely long make check's.
> >
> > Or is there another reason not to expand the tests?
>
> I'm not concerned so much about the runtime as the development and
> maintenance effort...
Shouldn't we at least add the one or two exemplary statements that
failed so we have some sort of coverage of the problem?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hideyuki Kawashima | 2007-02-10 13:58:05 | Sigres -- Accelerating INSERT/UPDATE with UPS |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-02-10 09:30:31 | Re: [PATCHES] How can I use 2GB of shared buffers on Windows? |