From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest |
Date: | 2015-07-28 23:14:27 |
Message-ID: | 525.1438125267@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 5:22 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 07/28/2015 11:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> Do we want to have this in src/test/modules or src/bin/pg_dump/t?
>> Are we testing pg_dump here, or are we testing extensions? If the
>> former, src/bin/pg_dump/t seems best.
> All the tests are using pg_dump, but it is testing dumpable tables in
> an extension. At this point I am not sure which one is better honestly
> X/.
ISTM we're testing pg_dump, but I don't especially want to clutter
the pg_dump directory with the code for a dummy extension, so I'd
vote for putting the extension code under src/test/modules.
(Or you could hide it inside src/bin/pg_dump/t/, but that seems
pretty weird too.)
In the end though, this is the sort of thing we generally leave to the
discretion of the responsible committer. I won't whinge too hard
about whatever the decision is ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Conway | 2015-07-28 23:26:12 | Re: more RLS oversights |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2015-07-28 23:04:29 | Re: more RLS oversights |