| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set |
| Date: | 2021-10-11 00:40:53 |
| Message-ID: | YWOIFXcxD1PKKfQt@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 04:07:43PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 03.10.21 09:03, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 11:34:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Maybe we could leave test.sh in place for awhile? I'd rather
>>> not cause a flag day for buildfarm owners. (Also, how do we
>>> see this working in the back branches?)
>>
>> I would be fine with test.sh staying around for now.
>
> test.sh could be changed to invoke the TAP test.
That would remove the possibility to run the tests of pg_upgrade with
--enable-tap-tests, which is the point I think Tom was making, because
TestUpgrade.pm in the buildfarm code just uses "make check" as of the
following:
$cmd = "cd $self->{pgsql}/src/bin/pg_upgrade && $make $instflags check";
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-10-11 00:45:26 | Re: strange case of "if ((a & b))" |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-10-11 00:23:32 | Re: Parallel vacuum workers prevent the oldest xmin from advancing |