From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add 'basebackup_to_shell' contrib module. |
Date: | 2022-03-25 17:52:11 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ6DdRe0=YYv-dXfKCpfwaoKdUXP6gXg7qVB=3FwON1GA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:36 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Create a CF entry for it, or enable CI on a github repo?
I created a CF entry for it. Then I had to try to Google around to
find the URL from the cfbot, because it's not even linked from
commitfest.postgresql.org for some reason. #blamemagnus
I don't think that the Windows CI is running the TAP tests for
contrib. At least, I can't find any indication of it in the output. So
it doesn't really help to assess how portable this test is, unless I'm
missing something.
I looked through the Linux output. It looks to me like that does run
the TAP tests for contrib. Unfortunately, the output is not in order
and is also not labelled, so it's hard to tell what output goes with
what contrib module. I named my test 001_basic.pl, but there are 12 of
those already. I see that 13 copies of 001_basic.pl seem to have
passed CI on Linux, so I guess the test ran and passed there. It seems
like it would be an awfully good idea to mention the subdirectory name
before each dump of output.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-25 18:23:54 | pgsql: Harden TAP tests that intentionally corrupt page checksums. |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-03-25 16:36:19 | Re: pgsql: Add 'basebackup_to_shell' contrib module. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-25 17:56:42 | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-03-25 17:34:21 | Re: pg_dump new feature: exporting functions only. Bad or good idea ? |