Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto
| От | Peter Eisentraut |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 200702101036.58691.peter_e@gmx.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto
Re: Ooops ... seems we need a re-release pronto |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Jim Nasby <decibel@decibel.org> writes: > > On Feb 6, 2007, at 12:40 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> ... massive expansion of the tests doesn't seem justified > > > > What about the idea that's been floated in the past about a -- > > extensive mode for regression testing that would (generally) only > > be used by the build farm. That would mean others wouldn't have to > > suffer through extremely long make check's. > > > > Or is there another reason not to expand the tests? > > I'm not concerned so much about the runtime as the development and > maintenance effort... Shouldn't we at least add the one or two exemplary statements that failed so we have some sort of coverage of the problem? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: