Re: pg_upgrade and extra_float_digits
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_upgrade and extra_float_digits |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4BF0ABFD.6020804@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_upgrade and extra_float_digits (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_upgrade and extra_float_digits
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > >> Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >>> It's going to require some fancy dancing to get the buildfarm to do it. >>> Each buildfarm run is for a specific branch, and all the built artefacts >>> are normally thrown away. >>> > > >> Uh, that is not actually a problem. You just need to set >> extra_float_digits=-3 to create the dump file, which is only done once >> for each major version. >> > > Wrong. In the first place, we're not going to start carrying something > as large as a pg_dump of the regression database as part of the source > code for the buildfarm. Even if we wanted to, it wouldn't work because > the results aren't platform-independent --- there are float differences > and probably row ordering differences to worry about. In the second > place, it won't "only be done once", unless you imagine that we never > change the regression tests for back branches; a casual perusal of the > CVS logs will disprove that idea. > > The only thing that's really going to work here is to generate the dump > on the fly. > > > This whole discussion leads me to the conclusion that we need to look more imaginatively at our testing regime. When the buildfarm was created it (via pg_regress) covered a lot of what we needed to test, but that is becoming less and less true. Not only does pg_upgrade need testing but we need to devise some sort of automated testing regime for SR and HS, among other things. pg_regress is showing it's age a bit, I think. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: