Re: [PATCH] Honor PG_TEST_NOCLEAN for tempdirs

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Honor PG_TEST_NOCLEAN for tempdirs
Date: 2023-06-30 07:09:03
Message-ID: ZJ5/j9AwWZGyPiGU@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 09:05:59AM -0700, Jacob Champion wrote:
> Sounds good -- 0002 can be ignored as needed, then. (Or I can resend a
> v3 for CI purposes, if you'd like.)

I am assuming that this is 0001 posted here:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/8be3d35a-9608-b1d5-e5e6-7a744ea45fef@timescale.com

And that looks OK to me. This is something I'd rather backpatch down
to v11 on usability ground for developers. Any comments or objections
about that?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2023-06-30 07:41:02 Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.
Previous Message shveta malik 2023-06-30 07:06:07 Re: Support logical replication of DDLs