| From: | Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel regress tests (was Re: FOREIGN KEY and shift/reduce) |
| Date: | 1999-12-07 18:09:50 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSO.4.02A.9912071904440.3057-100000@Panter.DoCS.UU.SE |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Tom Lane wrote:
> wieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) writes:
> > I'm thinking about another enhancement to the regression test
> > now. Something where at least two sessions can run queries
> > in a predefined order. Otherwise, something like the above
> > cannot be checked during regression.
> Peter, in your slicing and dicing of psql, did you end up with anything
> that might make this a feasible approach?
Um, you could call another psql from within psql, like so:
/* psql script */
create this
select that
\! psql -f 'second-script'
select more
That satisfies the requirement of two separate sessions and a predefined
order. I haven't actually tried it, but if it happens to not work as
desired, it could certainly be fixed.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-12-07 18:21:07 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel regress tests (was Re: FOREIGN KEY and shift/reduce) |
| Previous Message | Ed Loehr | 1999-12-07 18:08:58 | Re: [HACKERS] Raising funds for PostgreSQL |