| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps |
| Date: | 2019-08-20 02:00:21 |
| Message-ID: | 20190820020021.GC8326@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 10:23:19AM -0700, Melanie Plageman wrote:
> Could you do the check that all steps have been used in dry_run mode
> instead of when running the tests for real?
Sure, I was hesitating to do so. I have no issue in moving the check
into run_testspec(). So done as attached.
It is rather a pain to pass down custom options to isolationtester.
For example, I have tested the updated version attached after
hijacking -n into isolation_start_test(). Ugly hack, but for testing
that's enough. Do you make use of this tool in a particular way in
greenplum? Just wondering.
(Could it make sense to have long options for isolationtester by the
way?)
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| isolation-steps-unused-v2.patch | text/x-diff | 7.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2019-08-20 02:04:25 | Re: Zedstore - compressed in-core columnar storage |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-08-20 01:36:08 | Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps |