Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adjust pg_regress output for new long test names
Date: 2021-06-09 04:56:58
Message-ID: 20210609045658.GB491853@rfd.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 03:21:36PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:44 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > ... or we could shorten those file names. I recall an episode
> > awhile ago where somebody complained that their version of "tar"
> > couldn't handle some of the path names in our tarball, so
> > keeping things from getting to carpal-tunnel-inducing lengths
> > does have its advantages.
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 2:51 PM Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> > Not bad, but I would instead shorten the names to detach-[1234] or
> > detach-partition-[1234]. The marginal value of the second word is low, and
> > the third word helps even less.

Better still, the numbers can change to something descriptive:

detach-1 => detach-visibility
detach-2 => detach-fk-FOO
detach-3 => detach-incomplete
detach-4 => detach-fk-BAR

I don't grasp the difference between -2 and -4 enough to suggest concrete FOO
and BAR words.

> Alright, CC'ing Alvaro who added the long names to see if he wants to
> consider that.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ajin Cherian 2021-06-09 05:04:40 Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Previous Message Tatsuro Yamada 2021-06-09 04:55:19 Re: Duplicate history file?