Re: Bug in pg_dump

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gilles Darold <gilles(dot)darold(at)dalibo(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug in pg_dump
Date: 2015-03-04 05:03:59
Message-ID: CAB7nPqSfqPR-oWoGoek+JJv3d+mnz53fu44Fu2g4EOpyQCFf4g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> - set up basic scaffolding for TAP tests in src/bin/pg_dump

Agreed.

> - write a Perl function that can create an extension on the fly, given
> name, C code, SQL code

I am perplex about that. Where would the SQL code or C code be stored?
In the pl script itself? I cannot really see the advantage to generate
automatically the skeletton of an extension based on some C or SQL
code in comparison to store the extension statically as-is. Adding
those extensions in src/test/modules is out of scope to not bloat it,
so we could for example add such test extensions in t/extensions/ or
similar, and have prove_check scan this folder, then install those
extensions in the temporary installation.

> - add to the proposed t/001_dump_test.pl code to write the extension
> - add that test to the pg_dump test suite
> Eventually, the dump-and-restore routine could also be refactored, but
> as long as we only have one test case, that can wait.

Agreed on all those points.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2015-03-04 06:10:19 Re: a fast bloat measurement tool (was Re: Measuring relation free space)
Previous Message Asif Naeem 2015-03-04 04:37:26 Re: chkpass with RANDOMIZE_ALLOCATED_MEMORY