Re: [HACKERS] Why have we got both largeobject and large_object test files?
От | Stephen Frost |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Why have we got both largeobject and large_object test files? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170717165948.GA1769@tamriel.snowman.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [HACKERS] Why have we got both largeobject and large_object test files? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Why have we got both largeobject and large_object test files?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom, * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > I happened to notice that the regression tests contain both > largeobject.sql and large_object.sql. This seems at best confusing and at > worst a source of mistakes. The second file was added in March by commit > ff992c074, has never been touched by any other commit, and is only 8 lines > long. Was there a really good reason not to incorporate that test into > largeobject.sql? Just to be clear that we're talking about the same thing- there is no 'largeobject.sql' in a clean source tree. There is a 'largeobject.source' in src/test/regress/input which is converted to largeobject.sql. As for the general question of if the two could be merged, I can't think of any reason off-hand why that wouldn't work, nor do I have any particular recollection as to why I created a new file instead of using the existing. My shell history tells me that I found largeobject.source while crafting the test case but not why I didn't use it. The main thing is that the large_object.sql was specifically added to test pg_upgrade/pg_dump, so the created object needs to be kept around in the regression database with the comment after the tests run for that to happen. Thanks! Stephen
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: