| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydata(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask |
| Date: | 2018-01-20 22:47:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20180120224720.GD1311@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:54:23PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> If the only problem is that buildfarm would run tests twice, then I
> think we should just press forward with this regardless of that: it
> seems a chicken-and-egg problem, because buildfarm cannot be upgraded to
> use some new test method if the method doesn't exist yet. As a
> solution, let's just live with some run duplication for a period until
> the machines are upgraded to a future buildfarm client code.
>
> If there are other problems, let's see what they are so that we can fix
> them.
The main complain I received about this move of the pg_upgrade tests to
be a TAP one is that they don't support easily cross-major version
upgrades, removing some abilities to what a developer or the builfarm
can actually do. Making this possible would require first some
refactoring of PostgresNode.pm so as a node is aware of the binary paths
it uses to be able to manipulate multiple instances with different
install paths at the same time.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-01-20 23:16:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Deadlock in XLogInsert at AIX |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2018-01-20 22:45:25 | Re: Use of term hostaddrs for multiple hostaddr values |