> On 30 Mar 2023, at 20:44, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Maybe it'd be close enough to expect there to be no roles named
> "regress_xxx". In combination with
> -DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS, that would prevent us
> from accidentally leaving stuff behind, and we could hope that it doesn't
> cause false failures in real installations.
Would that check be always on or only when pg_regress is compiled with
-DENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS?
> Another idea could be for pg_regress to enforce that "select count(*)
> from pg_roles" gives the same answer before and after the test run.
That wouldn't prevent the contents of pg_roles to have changed though, so there
is a (slim) false positive risk with that no?
--
Daniel Gustafsson