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
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 |