Re: PG_TEST_EXTRA and meson

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tristan Partin <tristan(at)partin(dot)io>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG_TEST_EXTRA and meson
Date: 2024-07-17 14:09:44
Message-ID: CAOYmi+mmJUan4j4bONGvxthNZ5pPS1oyFGjDSug6bs2LoKidWw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 3:34 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Sorry, the previous reply was wrong; I misunderstood what you said.
> Yes, that is how the patch was coded and I agree that getting rid of
> config time PG_TEST_EXTRA could be a better alternative.

Personally I use the config-time PG_TEST_EXTRA extensively. I'd be sad
to see it go, especially if developers are no longer forced to use it.
(In practice, I don't change that setting much after initial
configure, because I use separate worktrees/build directories for
different patchsets. And the reconfiguration is fast when I do need to
modify it.)

Thanks,
--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrei Lepikhov 2024-07-17 14:09:49 Re: Expand applicability of aggregate's sortop optimization
Previous Message Ron Johnson 2024-07-17 13:49:26 Re: filesystem full during vacuum - space recovery issues