Re: Remaining 'needs review' patchs in July commitfest

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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