Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?

From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we use make -k on the buildfarm?
Date: 2010-11-08 15:27:39
Message-ID: 4CD816EB.5070904@kaltenbrunner.cc
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> On 11/06/2010 01:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What I *have* occasionally
>>> wished for is that the buildfarm script would act more like make -k with
>>> respect to the various test stages.
>
>> I'm not sure that would be a great advance. Certainly, right now I'm
>> going to be putting effort into the FTS stuff which I think should be
>> much higher up your list of wants.
>
> Agreed, that would be far more useful.

FTS stuff? Would that also include additions to the current SOAP
interface of the buildfarm?

lg

Stefan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-11-08 15:31:22 Re: SQL/MED estimated time of arrival?
Previous Message Aidan Van Dyk 2010-11-08 15:10:18 Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal